No to mandatory vaccination
The Government has generated 'manufactured consent' for its lockdown policies. The data is crafted to support Government policy, rather than existing as an independent body of advice to inform policy.
This article featured in out fourteenth print issue, available for purchase here.
Who could have predicted two years ago that the commencement of the new decade would herald a micromanaged medical police state? The Coronavirus Act, rammed through Parliament in March, has gifted the Government an Enabling Act, allowing the Prime Minister and his cabinet to effectively rule by decree. If anyone at a New Year’s Eve party had prophesised that nationwide de-facto house arrests, forced business closures — and so on — would arrive in a matter of weeks, any listener in the near vicinity would have been concerned that they’d had far too much to drink.
Now, this nation faces the possibility of mandatory vaccination; of having foreign chemicals coercively injected into the body. Don’t believe this? At the time of writing, Health Secretary Matt Hancock has yet to rule out the possibility, and we have all sensed the vibrations of the Government’s carpet-bombing tactics flung recklessly against the virus.
Whitehall’s response to the pandemic hasn’t simply been disproportionately heavy-handed, but the most severe violation of civil liberties in British peace-time history by a democratically elected government.
The populace should not easily lose their civil rights in the event of a crisis — but a crisis is welcomed with open arms by a power-hungry state apparatus, as Nobel Prize winning economist Friedrich Hayek once declared: 'Emergencies have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded.’
Whilst Parliament must still vote on renewing the Government’s emergency powers, Downing Street faces no resistance from a submissive party and an ‘opposition' that behaves more like a cheerleading squad. Parliament is a pro-lockdown echo chamber. Although the 'rebellion' against last year’s implementation of the tier system was the largest we have seen yet, the Government’s grip on the chamber is still far too strong.
Nevertheless, arguably the most worrying sign of the lockdown is how eagerly vast segments of the population have been willing to chain themselves into compliance. Even under the most restrictive epochs of the lockdown, polls consistently unveiled that the public was largely in favour of the policies taken at the time.
What explains this outcome? One suspect is the Furlough racket, which bribes the masses into staying indoors. Another cause is undoubtedly Operation Terror: a joint campaign by the Government and media to terrify the populace into a state of hysteria. Through blanket coverage of the pandemic, a focus on the death/case rates, with the numerous unfounded statistical assertions serving as the icing on the cake.
The Government has generated 'manufactured consent' for its lockdown policies. The data is crafted to support Government policy, rather than existing as an independent body of advice to inform policy.
This is why little-to-no concern has been shown towards the economy, job security, cancer patients requiring NHS treatment, or mental health; there is a possibility that the side effects of lockdown will kill more than the virus.
If a policy of mandatory vaccination does go ahead, Operation Terror will have its accelerator pressed to the floor, complete with scaremongering predictions of the hundreds of thousands who will perish if even one person does not vaccinate.
If a mandatory vaccine decree does arrive, it will not be enforced by the non-vaccinated being dragged from their beds in the dead of night to their local 'Coronavirus Prevention Centre', and then strapped to a board, like Hannibal Lecter, to be forcibly injected. No. Enforcement will take the form of Chinese-style social credit score punishments: Haven’t taken the vaccine? Can’t go to the pub. Haven’t received the jab? Can’t get a job (not that many will be going round). (We are seeing signs of this already)'.
The devolved Welsh Government has recently pledged to grant identity cards to those who have been vaccinated, with enforcement clearly being the ulterior motive. 'Boris' Johnson has yet to rule out such a similar scheme taking place in England.
The Government is more than happy to wield the stick for non-compliance: arrests and fines of £10,000 for attending anti-lockdown protests; Covid Marshalls on the streets the minute curfew starts to scout out any Speakeasys; drone-spying on dog walkers in March.
In preserving liberty, governments must always proceed through the democratic channels of persuasion. The Government should reassure people that the vaccine is safe to use (this is, after all, the most rapidly produced vaccine in medical history), and only recommend that people take it.
There is no reason to suspect that the vaccine is harmful - it has passed all the necessary stages, but its usage must remain a personal choice.
It would likely be those demographics already at the top of the Government’s vaccine rationing list who would seek it anyway. For the rest of the population, the vaccine is largely unnecessary as the disease does not pose a considerable threat — not everyone receives the annual flu jab for the same reason.
But personal choice conflicts with the Government’s wholly utilitarian approach to the virus, which has designated the populace as disposable and to be treated like disobedient children needing to be controlled.
Although nothing has been confirmed at the time of writing, it is wise to pre-emptively say no to mandatory vaccination.
