Mandatory Vaxx is a Masterpiece of Hypocrisy (Plus: Unpractical Pragmatism)

2 100
Avatar for dr_preobrazhensky
2 years ago

“You have no right to put me at risk (with COVID) so you must be forcibly put at risk (via the vaxx) to prevent your putting me at risk.”

This is the implicit position of those who support mandatory (or effectively mandatory) vaccination—whether they know it or not.

When COVID vaccines first became available, we were implored by our so-called leaders and so-called experts to go get vaccinated.

Fair enough. 

If a man believes strongly in something, it’s his prerogative to recommend it to you. 

It’s equally your prerogative to thoughtfully consider and, if you believe it to be the correct course of action, reject his suggestion.

It is, after all, just a suggestion, isn’t it…?

Not to the professional psychopaths in politics and the media, it ain’t.

Their recommendations are not earnest appeals to your reason. 

It is very deadly to assume that the function of communication between a tyrant and those he seeks to manipulate—whether on the interpersonal level or en masse—is equivalent to that of an exchange between individuals with a conscience and an honest respect for others’ boundaries.

These are merely the first of an endless series of assaults on those same boundaries. 

The aim of these professional psychos is to patiently and gradually win one imperceptible concession after another, until you are so docile and submissive that you will have neither the means nor even the inclination to rebel against the next, increasingly egregious incursions. 

After all, you are the one who failed to hold the line at each step of the way. Death by a thousand cuts. And you permitted each one because what’s the use kicking up a fuss over one, teeny, tiny little scratch?

If you’ve ever had the misfortune of dealing with narcissistic personalities in your personal life, you may recognize the same modus operandi at play here on the macro scale. 

Same playbook, same psychos, larger scope.

So to reiterate, imploring / suggesting is a tactical maneuver by the goons in suits; it’s merely meant to serve as a plausible veneer of benevolence prior to taking a harder line. 

You see, imploring maintains the appearance of respecting your free will. It may be an impassioned suggestion but it is ultimately just a suggestion. And we are, in theory, free to ignore suggestions. Harmless, right?

Then, after so many weeks or months of imploring, you are presented with information that attempts to show how your refusal to do as suggested by those who presume to know better (“experts”) has led to disastrous consequences. This is likely a giant exaggeration, if not an outright lie. 

These consequences, you’re told, are so dire that perhaps mere imploring is insufficient to prevent them. 

No credible evidence that following the recommendation would have led to different outcomes is asked for or provided.

In fact, in the case of the COVID virus, several notable and highly reputable scientists—e.g. Knut Wittkowski, et al—urged the immediate cessation of all lockdowns and restrictions on the basis that respiratory ailments of this nature naturally die out in a matter of weeks / months, while policies like those currently in play simply extend and delay the virus’s lifecycle while allowing it to mutate, and wreck the world economy and countless lives—a not-insignificant factor which the psycho do-gooders didn’t bother to consider for even a moment because it didn’t align with their agenda and the unprecedented opportunity for a power grab.

After a period of cyclically imploring you to get vaxxed and confabulating horror stories meant to prove how your refusal to act on the advice of your benevolent leaders is slaughtering your fellow man by the millions, you’re now sufficiently annoyed, frightened, flustered and groomed for the next step.

Imploring is still played in the background to preserve the illusion of respect for your freedom of choice while incentives and ultimatums are slowly introduced and take the fore. 

Incentives to “do the right thing” (e.g. what you’re being told to do) include social approbation, a bump in status, discounts on goods and services, and, in some cases, cash money (taxpayer funded of course). 

Ultimatums are given to individuals and business in the form of:

“if you’re not vaccinated, you don’t get to ‘x’,” where ‘x’ = “work”, “eat in a restaurant”, “shop in the mall”, “go to the gym”, “play in the park with your kids”, etc. 

It’s Psycho Algebra 101.

“X” is a variable. It can take on any value the career confabulators desire. 

And now we’re seeing the next logical and entirely predictable manifestation of this policy: mandates. 

At this point the nihilistic tyrants begin to (again, gradually) abandon any pretense of respect for your boundaries or rights. You’ve been naughty naughty. You didn’t listen to us. Now we have to MAKE you do what WE think is right for you (couched as “for the public good”, “for society”, “for public health”; and sundry collectivities that include everybody except for you). 

Not only that, you will take it and LIKE it, slave!

By the way, a large number of people think this is perfectly acceptable. 

They argue on so-called practical grounds about the relative merits and dangers of the vaccine vs getting COVID vs keeping businesses open. This is all irrelevant, masturbatory bean counting. One must be practical, Mr. Roark. 

The fundamental contradiction exists on the philosophical level.

You can summarize this masterpiece of hypocrisy in one simple sentence:

“You have no right to put me at risk (with COVID) so you must be forcibly put at risk (with the vaxx) to prevent your putting me at risk.”

That is exactly what those who support any kind of mandate or coercion are advocating, whether they realize it or not. 

There is of course the inconvenient evidence that shows how vaccines not only fail to prevent COVID infection and transmission but actually facilitate them. There is also evidence suggesting that, at least with the delta variant, vaxxed and unvaxxed persons face approximately the same outcomes. 

But I reiterate that these kinds of points are irrelevant and must not form the basis of your support nor opposition to this matter. If you want to keep what’s left of your freedom and maybe even pass some on to the next generation, you must take the battle to the high philosophical ground.

You see, arguing your position on the basis of practicality / pragmatism is a fatal mistake. 

In fact, it is the least practical way to combat the assault on your most basic rights. 

Allow me to explain. 

It may be the case now that the vaccines do a relatively poor job of accomplishing their intended purpose. 

But even if they were totally safe and perfectly effective, it would still be an unacceptable violation of your rights to force you to take them. 

Read that again. 

There is no question of degree when it comes to being forced to put something into your body that you don’t want. 

You cannot be "a little raped".

You’re either forced or left alone to make your own choice. 

Whether the item is a vaccination or a benign Vitamin C infusion is totally irrelevant.

You either have full sovereignty over your life—and by extension your body—or you don’t. 

It’s not a matter of WHAT you’re being forced to take; it’s a question of WHETHER anybody has the right to force you take anything, regardless of what it is. 

And they don’t, because it’s philosophically indefensible. 

That is the only issue of consequence and the only truly effective means of fighting tyranny of any kind.

All of the so called practical arguments concede the principle of the matter, provide ammunition to masterful manipulators, and make it a bean counting affair of relative risks and merits; this set of stats vs that set of stats, etc. 

Once you principally accept the violation of your fundamental rights for the sake of ‘practicality’, it’s only a matter of time before the spin doctors fudge the numbers in their favor and your so-called practical defense falls apart.

You must defend your right to your life—and by extension, your body—on the most basic of levels. Any incursion must be met with opposition immediately and with the appropriate intensity.

You and you alone have ownership over your body. You are the only one who may decide what to introduce into it. Any attempt to coerce you into taking a medicine, a vitamin, a vaccine, a sip of water, or any other damn thing, is an act of high treason against the individual and therefore, against mankind as a whole. 

And if you’ve got any practicality in you; if you want your kids to inherit any of the freedoms you’ve enjoyed in your lifetime—you will stop defending yourself on “practical” grounds. 

5
$ 1.07
$ 1.00 from @daring-celt
$ 0.05 from @Gemstone
$ 0.02 from @Mictorrani
Avatar for dr_preobrazhensky
2 years ago

Comments

Great! Thanks for your bravery!

God gave people free will, and NOBODY has the right to take it away Now is the right time to remember this...

$ 0.00
2 years ago

Bravo! Wonderful first article here. Welcome!

$ 0.00
2 years ago