3 ms·

I think, (or hope rather) that the mandates are well meaning, no I don't think this is dictatorship, rather I'm addressing your more "meta" point about social r

I think, (or hope rather) that the mandates are well meaning, no I don't think this is dictatorship, rather I'm addressing your more "meta" point about social responsibility and the perils of one group being able to dictate to others without input. As in, we can't just say "We have some social responsibilities so you must XX per the authorities" when XX is self serving, counterproductive, useless or harmful. We have an individual right, and responsibility, to weigh the dictates we are given at some point, perhaps not on all issues, but on some. Other vaccines were not taken in to market in this manner. It is a novel vaccine.

jacquesm 5y ago
> the perils of one group being able to dictate to others without input This is pretty much the norm in any country that is a democracy but that does not have coalition governments. You get a kind of see-sawing effect where one group will enact a bunch of stuff and then when the tables are turned it all gets undone. It's stupendously inefficient. Democracy is quite flawed but it still is the best mechanism for government that we have that is sustainable over a longer period of time.
- stormking 5y ago
  Democracy in itself is nothing more then the dictatorship of the majority. It certainly doesn't constitute a just society, alone. In addition, you need at least fundamental, untouchable civil rights, protection of minorities and the rule of the law.