Coronavirus Thread VII: Jagged Little Pill (READ OP)

[The Reformed American Republic]

Public health and safety is something reasonable for the government to manage. Your ideology is what happens when individualism goes too far, and to be honest, society should not even entertain your ideas and institute mandatory vaccinations, proudly disregarding those who want to further atomize society.

Individualism...can go too far? Perhaps I just don't see much of a benefit in preaching and looking down on people who don't make the same life choices as I do, never seen the joy in it. All I ask is that governments adopt the same policy of giving a damn about free will.

Why should I care about your "free will" to seek out crowds when you're infected? If you bring society down by trying to discouraging vaccination and going out when you know you're sick, you should be punished for doing so, disregarding all mental gymnastics to the contrary.

[The Reformed American Republic]

I can't either as it's paywalled.

Is it due to the GDPR?

For ABH, yes, but for me, no, as I live outside of Europe. We're both blocked but for different reasons.

[Kannap]

Basically we're back to you wanting to do whatever you want and everyone has to put their lives at risk to accomodate your selfish behaivour.

You know the beauty of individualism? You're an individual too! You get to do what you want as well under the system I propose.

Are you wealthy? Must be nice to have freedom to do as you wish under our current capitalist system.

[Maricarland]

Glibness: Off

Public safety and welfare very much is something that the government is responsible for, especially if it's a democratic government. Preventing people from endangering others and protecting people from hazards is arguably the primary purpose of government, for the simple reason that it's good to help people. I could say some high-minded things about natural rights and how this logically follows from yada yada yada but that's all it really comes down to. It's bad to let people suffer, it's bad to allow people to cause suffering, and it's good to prevent suffering. Governments should mandate masks, social distancing, and vaccines because it will save lives, and hang any argument about "natural rights" that would say otherwise.

I won't deny that it's good to help people, so it's good to get the vaccine much as it's good to donate to charities. It's the same with regards saving lives honestly, if everyone gave a large amount to charity every month I'm sure that a lot of good work could be done. I'd oppose a government deciding that was something we needed to do as well, because we have our own money and should be able to spend it how we like.

I know this is off topic, but I am just wondering, what kind of anarchist are you? Anarcho-communism, Egoism, Mutualism, Etc... (Please don't say Anarcho-Capitalist, most anarchists do not consider anarcho-capitalists to be real anarchists, just people who use the anarchist label)

I ask this because I am having trouble piecing together a coherent understanding of your position.

[CoraSpia]

Individualism...can go too far? Perhaps I just don't see much of a benefit in preaching and looking down on people who don't make the same life choices as I do, never seen the joy in it. All I ask is that governments adopt the same policy of giving a damn about free will.

Why should I care about your "free will" to seek out crowds when you're infected? If you bring society down by trying to discouraging vaccination and going out when you know you're sick, you should be punished for doing so, disregarding all mental gymnastics to the contrary.

I've never discouraged vaccinations, I have only ever said that people should have the right to choose.

[The Reformed American Republic]

You know the beauty of individualism? You're an individual too! You get to do what you want as well under the system I propose.

Are you wealthy? Must be nice to have freedom to do as you wish under our current capitalist system.

Yes, he is very wealthy.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I won't deny that it's good to help people, so it's good to get the vaccine much as it's good to donate to charities. It's the same with regards saving lives honestly, if everyone gave a large amount to charity every month I'm sure that a lot of good work could be done. I'd oppose a government deciding that was something we needed to do as well, because we have our own money and should be able to spend it how we like.

I know this is off topic, but I am just wondering, what kind of anarchist are you? Anarcho-communism, Egoism, Mutualism, Etc... (Please don't say Anarcho-Capitalist, most anarchists do not consider anarcho-capitalists to be real anarchists, just people who use the anarchist label)

I ask this because I am having trouble piecing together a coherent understanding of your position.

He's a patrician "anarchist" with oodles of $$$'s.

[CoraSpia]

I won't deny that it's good to help people, so it's good to get the vaccine much as it's good to donate to charities. It's the same with regards saving lives honestly, if everyone gave a large amount to charity every month I'm sure that a lot of good work could be done. I'd oppose a government deciding that was something we needed to do as well, because we have our own money and should be able to spend it how we like.

I know this is off topic, but I am just wondering, what kind of anarchist are you? Anarcho-communism, Egoism, Mutualism, Etc... (Please don't say Anarcho-Capitalist, most anarchists do not consider anarcho-capitalists to be real anarchists, just people who use the anarchist label)

I ask this because I am having trouble piecing together a coherent understanding of your position.

I started off as anarcho-capitalist and then got a hell of a lot more anarcho and a bit less capitalist. So idk...anarcho kind of capitalist.

[Izandai]

I won't deny that it's good to help people, so it's good to get the vaccine much as it's good to donate to charities. It's the same with regards saving lives honestly, if everyone gave a large amount to charity every month I'm sure that a lot of good work could be done. I'd oppose a government deciding that was something we needed to do as well, because we have our own money and should be able to spend it how we like.

I know this is off topic, but I am just wondering, what kind of anarchist are you? Anarcho-communism, Egoism, Mutualism, Etc... (Please don't say Anarcho-Capitalist, most anarchists do not consider anarcho-capitalists to be real anarchists, just people who use the anarchist label)

I ask this because I am having trouble piecing together a coherent understanding of your position.

Seems pretty simple to me (unless I'm wrong). They value a particular kind of "free will" above all other concerns, including all kinds of public welfare. It's a selfish, destructive, abhorrent worldview to have, but you can't say it isn't internally consistent.

[The Reformed American Republic]

I know this is off topic, but I am just wondering, what kind of anarchist are you? Anarcho-communism, Egoism, Mutualism, Etc... (Please don't say Anarcho-Capitalist, most anarchists do not consider anarcho-capitalists to be real anarchists, just people who use the anarchist label)

I ask this because I am having trouble piecing together a coherent understanding of your position.

I started off as anarcho-capitalist and then got a hell of a lot more anarcho and a bit less capitalist. So idk...anarcho kind of capitalist.

I don't think you have an ideology beyond "I do what I want regardless of how it impacts others." If society ran by your ideas it probably wouldn't last for very long and collapse into warring gangs and oppressed citizenry living at their mercy.

[CoraSpia]

I started off as anarcho-capitalist and then got a hell of a lot more anarcho and a bit less capitalist. So idk...anarcho kind of capitalist.

I don't think you have an ideology beyond "I do what I want regardless of how it impacts others." If society ran by your ideas it probably wouldn't last for very long and collapse into warring gangs and oppressed citizenry living at their mercy.

I have a clear distinction between intentional harm and unintentional harm, and I've been very consistent on this in covid and other threads. Mine isn't a selfish ideology, I frequently speak in defence of other groups who have their freedoms supressed.

[The Reformed American Republic]

I don't think you have an ideology beyond "I do what I want regardless of how it impacts others." If society ran by your ideas it probably wouldn't last for very long and collapse into warring gangs and oppressed citizenry living at their mercy.

I have a clear distinction between intentional harm and unintentional harm, and I've been very consistent on this in covid and other threads. Mine isn't a selfish ideology, I frequently speak in defence of other groups who have their freedoms supressed.

It is a selfish ideology. Defending other people's selfishness doesn't change that.

[Izandai]

I don't think you have an ideology beyond "I do what I want regardless of how it impacts others." If society ran by your ideas it probably wouldn't last for very long and collapse into warring gangs and oppressed citizenry living at their mercy.

I have a clear distinction between intentional harm and unintentional harm, and I've been very consistent on this in covid and other threads. Mine isn't a selfish ideology, I frequently speak in defence of other groups who have their freedoms supressed.

But not in defense of groups who have their wellbeing endangered by others exercising their "freedoms" yeah?

[CoraSpia]

I have a clear distinction between intentional harm and unintentional harm, and I've been very consistent on this in covid and other threads. Mine isn't a selfish ideology, I frequently speak in defence of other groups who have their freedoms supressed.

But not in defense of groups who have their wellbeing endangered by others exercising their "freedoms" yeah?

A downside to it, which I admit, is that it's not great if you have underlying health conditions or disabilities.
I also recognise, before anyone points it out, that I'm blind and that this includes me.

[The Reformed American Republic]

But not in defense of groups who have their wellbeing endangered by others exercising their "freedoms" yeah?

A downside to it, which I admit, is that it's not great if you have underlying health conditions or disabilities.
I also recognise, before anyone points it out, that I'm blind and that this includes me.

But you don't speak for everyone who will be harmed by this. The fact you are blind is notwithstanding.

[CoraSpia]

A downside to it, which I admit, is that it's not great if you have underlying health conditions or disabilities.
I also recognise, before anyone points it out, that I'm blind and that this includes me.

But you don't speak for everyone who will be harmed by this. The fact you are blind is notwithstanding.

I know, I'm admitting it's not perfect.

[The Reformed American Republic]

But you don't speak for everyone who will be harmed by this. The fact you are blind is notwithstanding.

I know, I'm admitting it's not perfect.

I'm saying you should abandon most of your ideology, or tone the individualism down to more reasonable levels.

[Spirit of Hope]

Harm isn't neatly divided into intentional and unintentional, just because you don't intend to hurt someone doesn't stop your actions from being dangerous to others. Doing something that you know has a high chance to gravely endanger others isn't ok just because you are not intentionally hurting them.

Drunk driving is the obvious example of this, drunk drivers aren't drinking and driving with the intention of killing others, however their actions greatly endanger others.

[Vassenor]

OK, so you want to choose not to take the vaccine because individualism. Why should everyone else be forced to enable that choice and thus rob them of their individual agency?

[The Reformed American Republic]

there is no punchline

i mean, it's good that you haven't had people die on you, that you're not checking up on family currently infected, that you're not worried that they might possibly die and aren't suffering

too fucking bad not all of us can take that advice, whatever your motivations

None of them have been infected, and most of them haven't altered a lot about how they live their lives due to the pandemic.

I, myself, have done absolutely nothing different since this all started.

I had a family friend die and I cannot count how many people around me had it. One of my professors is in quarantine right now and both my next door neighbors had it. So did many family friends. Hell, I know someone who got it twice, once for not taking it seriously, and the second time for thinking his natural immunity extended to all the other variants, which it did not. He got very very sick. Even if only one percent die, the amount of people who get it bad is higher than that, putting strain on our medical system. In fact, it is due to the hard work of our medical system that ensures that only 1-2% die, just imagine if our system failed. Deaths would rise for sure.

[Ethel mermania]

OK, so you want to choose not to take the vaccine because individualism. Why should everyone else be forced to enable that choice and thus rob them of their individual agency?

Most folks don't like trans people, why should we allow trans folks, and rob the bigots of their agency?

[Spirit of Hope]

OK, so you want to choose not to take the vaccine because individualism. Why should everyone else be forced to enable that choice and thus rob them of their individual agency?

Most folks don't like trans people, why should we allow trans folks, and rob the bigots of their agency?

I was unaware that bigots could be killed by the presence of trans people. Meanwhile not getting vaccinated does allow covid to better spread, which will kill people.

Probably wouldn't have worded the argument like Vassenor does, but the basic question is: what is the reason for healthy people to not get vaccinated?

[Vassenor]

OK, so you want to choose not to take the vaccine because individualism. Why should everyone else be forced to enable that choice and thus rob them of their individual agency?

Most folks don't like trans people, why should we allow trans folks, and rob the bigots of their agency?

Your lame attempt at a NO U has been noticed, laughed at and discarded.

[The Blaatschapen]

OK, so you want to choose not to take the vaccine because individualism. Why should everyone else be forced to enable that choice and thus rob them of their individual agency?

Most folks don't like trans people, why should we allow trans folks, and rob the bigots of their agency?

I once sat next to a Trans person in the metro. (it's after all, public transportation, not cisportation)

I caught it. Now I'm trans too.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

Most folks don't like trans people, why should we allow trans folks, and rob the bigots of their agency?

I was unaware that bigots could be killed by the presence of trans people. Meanwhile not getting vaccinated does allow covid to better spread, which will kill people.

Probably wouldn't have worded the argument like Vassenor does, but the basic question is: what is the reason for healthy people to not get vaccinated?

Fear, uncertainty and doubt, I guess? But that's what led me to get the vaccine: fear that I'd be first in line among the young to die due to asthma and living around smokers, uncertainty about my chances of survival, and doubt that without the vaccine I'd be able to resume normal life safely.
Eventually some irresponsible people in my workplace gave me the plague two weeks ago. Thanks to the vaccine, I overcame their stupidity and disregard.