6 ms·
> The correct way is to explain to them the reasons that you feel it's good for them, or for those around them, and then let them make the decision. The proble
by luckylion 4y ago
> The correct way is to explain to them the reasons that you feel it's good for them, or for those around them, and then let them make the decision.
The problem is, at least for many societies, that we don't operate on "you get to choose, but you have to live with the consequences". If you choose not to get vaccinated because you want to avoid becoming a walking 5g transmitter programmed by Bill Gates, and you get sick and need emergency care, you're not going to be denied because you made the choice and knew the risk, which has implications for everyone else, because emergency care is limited etc etc.
- throwaway22032 4y agoYou're not understanding my point. Shouting people down, restricting their movements, trying to put them out of a job etc. is abusive behaviour. It works if the force is sufficient enough. That doesn't make it right.
- luckylion 4y agoSure, and I wasn't a fan of the approaches they used, but I do understand them. The alternative is either to accept their willful ignorance that will have life-threatening impact on third parties that weren't willfully ignorant, or to cut them off from societal institutions for anything that follows from their decisions. At least in Germany, that was the debate, and the folks who didn't want to get vaccinated didn't favor living with the consequences either. It's pretty much why we have mandatory retirement programs, because we don't trust the population at large to make smart decisions and we don't want them to rely on society after the consequences of their decisions manifest.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- throwaway22032 4y agoI'd love to go further into this but I feel that the attitude I expressed in my first post is coming into play here. I'll give you a short description, I guess. You're throwing around terms like "willful ignorance". It may not be conscious on your part, but that's patronising behaviour, and I don't feel a sense of goodwill there. I'd love to be able to elaborate further and enter into a proper discussion but I'm just tired.
- luckylion 4y agoWhat term would you prefer for something that just looks ignorant and no other explanation is given for why the person does it even after information has been shared with them?
- ashwagary 4y agoThere are many people much more educated than you in this field of study that chose not to be vaccinated. Are they ignorant or is it you? Leaving this decision up to individuals avoids the worst case scenario, which is species extinction because we acted like lemmings.
- luckylion 4y agoI'm sure there are good reasons to not be vaccinated. Those generally publicly shared (Bill Gates, UN-chips, 5g, radical degrowth by chemical neutering etc etc) were not among them. And it's like with most things. When 99% of weightlifters tell you that you cannot lift a metric ton, you'll probably want to listen to them and not the 1% who say you do, just because they can lift more weight than you.
- Zigurd 4y agoYou are ignoring that those "many" are a tiny minority among the educated. Cranks are always among us.
- jrs235 4y agoA lack of trust and confidence in the information provided and the motives of those prescribing the action?
- luckylion 4y agoPossibly, but many of them jumped straight into theories that were very 'out there', so I'm not sure how much of it was because of some considerations vs pure tribal instincts.
- 4y ago