However, if the truth of covid was exactly as they claimed, it would be immoral to not do what would protect everybody. In the hypothetical case where the vaccine is 100% safe and effective, and covid is real and highly lethal, claiming "freedom" actually does just mean "freedom to kill grandma".
In this case, you'd have people lining up for their mRNA shot absolutely freewillingly, even if the thing would be 100% optional and there was actual scarcity. Hell, if the supply was actually low in this situation, the gov would probably push out some propaganda to make sure some get the shot earlier than others.
To be clear, I'm not saying in this hypothetical that the government should send the goony squad to force inject anyone or lock people in their houses.
It is synonymous though, and honestly, would actually be reasonable in this line of thought: if you enforced a hidden mandate, because you can avoid it only if you go absolutely outcast, vast majority would comply. Next logical step is getting rid of the control system a la China; it does not make sense to keep the expensive and extensive mRNA certificate check infrastructure just for a percent of so purebloods. However, you can't have police check if some anti-vaxxer is going to Walmart constantly - so to save these resources, we go Greater Good and force-vaxx the remaining.
Now luckily, everything they say about covid is nonsense, so this is nothing more than a thought experiment.
if I understand right, around half your country, and all of blue cities, would gladly feel righteous and just again, drowning in tingles as they are better than those grandma murdering freedom lovers, so this thought experiment may materialize faster than anybody of us would want.
And, to be fair, I'd be hesitant to actually apply this hypothetical in a medical scenario. Big pharma are mass murderers. I very much don't like the idea of the government regulating medical decisions.
I chose this as covid unfolded right in front of our eyes. Sam stuff can be applied to everything where you have lobby groups, big industry and so on. Freedom as a value creates natural opposition to using emergency laws whenever the current gov feels to.
it's just a mask
it's only 2 weeks
they wear masks in asia all the time
Except objective reality shows us that the COVID vaccine is complete bullshit.
You know this, I know this. However, unless you go pure math, objective reality can be hard to observe or not even exist. From PoV of your average covidiot, the objective reality was that we are dealing with an ebola level outbreak, as they were told that by the mainstream. So, if it is OK to throw away freedom for noble causes, it is OK to do so now. No higher principle.
Yes, it would be nice to know when you can intervene and when not; however, apart for reasons like stated above you'd need a crystal ball to predict what will the outcome be, was it ever worth the price. Also, do this a few times and nobody will even bother with freedom anymore, as precedent has been set.
Just like calling something freedom doesn't make it freedom (i.e. freedom to infringe on other people's rights).
Nobody is arguing you should be free to break neighbour's windows because you are free. That's the argument of the left, and why you can do less and less shit, all for noble causes.
And freedom has to be a mean to an end. If it's the end, it will always result in social decay and societal collapse, since society operates on the rule of law, and not freedom
I feel that for last couple for decades, freedom didn't have the best press. Actually, people insisted on being the smarter, righteous and other nice sounding adjectives, freedom was for rednecks or other local slur.
How's the social decay going?
Everytime someone wants you to do something for greater good, check if what they really mean isn't their good.
The greater good is a just and righteous society. This necessarily involves hampering freedom
Those are such broad terms they can be used for everything. Your average covid believer thinks it is just and righteous to vaccinate yourself with hell knows what they designed and produced in one year, as you are righteously protecting others.
If freedom is a means to an end, you basically have social-democratic-whatever hell where stuff is allowed if it makes State/Gov richer or more powerful.
Imagine you are Klaus Gates de Rotschild and you get a report saying that yes, basically the sky is falling and we will be extinct by 2002 or so because of an largely inert carbon dioxide.
Knowing that, and keeping in mind that nice beachfront property you bought from your last insider trade, would you let it all go to waste by flying your private jet, or would you do your damnest to liquidate all sources of CO2 you can, throwing your own money at it, considering your own life is at stake?
So now, how the airport next to last climate summit looked?