Debunking the anti-vaxxer rhetoric

Why the anti-vaxxer argument does not hold up:

That is to say, why the vitriolic proponents of forced covid vaccines are categorically in the wrong

Here is my response to a hostile response to what had been an open and respectful discussion – certainly not on Big Tech-controlled social media, since that is now verboten, but on Minds, where freedom of speech and open discussion is still permitted, and encouraged

You are expressing precisely the lie that is at the heart of the official narrative: that people opposed to mandatory drug injections, including the covid vaccine, along with other authoritarian measures, are selfish people with no compassion. The reality is actually precisely the opposite.

People with little compassion have no strong values, other than their own comfort and perceived safety, and are willing to go along with just about anything, from Stalinism to Maoism, to fascism; and they will obey authority and conform to the group, simply because it is easier, more comfortable, and feels safer to do that, rather than adhere to any principles deriving from a deep-seated sense of compassion.

These are the same people who would work in the data centres of IBM managing computer punch cards so that millions of people can be sent to concentration camps, as they did in Nazi Germany, not so long ago; and they are the same people who would drive the trucks to the concentration camps – because they ask no questions, but simply conform and obey, because it is easier that way. The authorities and the crowd are always right in their mind – they have to be, because it requires too much of them to go against either one.

People with strong compassion, by contrast, have strong principles, which arise out of compassion; principles which they do not discard simply when it would be more convenient to do so.

People with compassion, who are also well informed, oppose, not necessarily all vaccines – and as such, the vitriolic and dehumanizing catch-all term of anti-vaxxer is a misnomer, a falsehood, as well as a simple form of abuse – but rather, they insist, legitimately and intelligently, that the vaccine or any other new drug, a) be adequately tested for safety, and b) be a matter of informed consent.

People who are both compassionate and well-informed oppose mandatory injection with the covid vaccine because: a) the minimal safety testing that was done on earlier vaccines has itself been cast aside, and the covid vaccines are not remotely adequately tested for safety; b) opposition to any medical treatment imposed by the state should be both suspect and resisted, for reasons of protecting fundamental human rights and freedom, without which, we will live in an authoritarian society not dissimilar to Communist China or the USSR; and c) thirdly, though actually the least important point, though it is empirically factual, because the epidemiological science and figures do not warrant such extreme measures.

There is much more to be discussed, but saying that anyone who is not willing to comply with mandatory injection of an experimental drug is by definition both an anti-vaxxer and callously lacking in compassion, is simply untrue and factually wrong. My principle reason, among others, for rejecting mandatory injection with the covid vaccine, is not for my own safety or protection, but for the safety and protection of my children, and for the safety and protection of all people. I am willing to risk potentially grave implications for my resistance, out of compassion for others. How is that in any way uncompassionate? Only in a distorted dream world ruled by corporate-state propaganda and indoctrination can one view that act as one of callousness and a lack of compassion.

In fact, your argument can easily be inverted. People who are in favour of mandatory covid vaccine injections are not only grossly misinformed, but are placing their own confused sense of personal security above the well-being and the very freedom of others. Who is the callous one? It is you.

J. Todd Ring,
February 9, 2021

See Canada’s leading constitutional lawyer, Rocco Galati, for further details