the true meaning of MAGA and anti-vaxxers....

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

those who hold to MAGA and those anti-vaxxers here and elsewhere
have a unspoken value… that their rights to “freedom” is above
everyone else’s rights… in other words, their rights are greater
then anyone else’s right… those who hold to MAGA values, which include
the right/freedom not to wear a mask, means that they have
their own self interest as the point of existence… in other words,
no one else’s right matters except those who hold MAGA values…

it is far more important to have one’s own freedom not to wear a mask
then it is to protect the health of others… so they say that other people
don’t matter in any way, shape or form… their freedom is greater then
other people right to life… this astonishing principle that one’s freedom
is greater then other people’s life violates the principle that people’s lives
matter… that we come first before the lives and rights of other people
not only violates the basic principles of the bible, but violates basic
human decency… take the parable of the good Samaritan is about
people who understand that we all, ALL OF US, counts, not just
those who hold to such dangerous principles of MAGA…

to deny the basic rights of others to defend one’s own values is to
court a society that Hobbes, among others, fought against, including
Jesus… that if we hold to the MAGA principle then we agree that
existence should be…

“solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”

the only way to avoid this bleak and existence ending principle, is to
understand that we must, must have an engagement with the principle
that other people values, society and its values have a worth greater then any
short sided and species ending MAGA values… that my values and rights come
before other people values and rights…

to hold that my values are the only values worth engaging with
is to believe in that Hobbisian universe of a ‘‘short, nasty…’’
existence…

to say I come before everyone else is to doom the human race
to extinction…and will be the results if MAGA values hold true in
5 years…extinction of the human is the the result of MAGA values,
no other possibility exists for having MAGA values…

Kropotkin

2

that human beings have done so much, discovered and become
much more then they started with, is because the value of
existence that has promoted or driven human progress is the value
that humans, us, is a better value then the one, me…

and MAGA values and anti-vaxxers values are the me, the one,
is more important then the collective, the us…

civilization has improved because of the thinking that
the we, us, is more important then the me, the one…
we can see this in Christianity and the values of Jesus…
who put the we, the us, before the me, the one…
think about Christian values… they put the ‘‘we’’ before the ‘‘me’’…

the parable of the “good Samaritan” is a “we” understanding before a “Me”
understanding… and this is important to note… the only way we survive as
a civilization, as a species, is to hold to the ‘‘we’’ before we hold to the ‘‘me’’…

we cannot nor should we survive if we ever put ourselves before others…

but Kropotkin… how do you justify this?

civilization, the society existed before we were born and will survive
after we are gone… thus society/civilization is something that
exists before and after us… we are truly temporary beings… we live
a short existence… and that shortness means we cannot be the answer to
the question “what it the point of existence?”

the answer to what it means to be human must lie with that that is more
permanent then we are individually… the point of existence, at least
according to evolution, is the continuation of existence… to hold to MAGA
values is to hold to the Hobbesian existence of a “short, nasty…” existence…

I hold that we human beings can find meaning and point of existence by
placing others and society first, with our existence being so temporary…
so what is more important, the individual or the collective?

Kropotkin

3

to reject the values of MAGA and anti-vaxxers means we put
society, the us, before the individual, the me…

and this is just another, another reason to reject the ism of
capitalism which places the individual, the one, before the
collective, the many… we must reject any ism that
places the one before the many…

thus we accept the idea of globalism before nationalism…
and we must work toward us, and not toward the one,
the individual… because we cannot survive individually,
we cannot in our modern world, be just one… for that path
leads to anarchy and the Hobbesian world of being “short, nasty…”

only by understanding that our survival, our collective survival
means we must engage as a people, as a species, in order that
we may go on as a people, as a species… believing in the one,
means we forsake us and accept only the one, me…and extinction
comes from us holding to the value of one, instead of the many…

the human race can only survive if we hold to the we, the collective
and not the me, the one…

Kropotkin

4

“and this is just another, another reason to reject the ism of
capitalism which places the individual, the one, before the
collective, the many… we must reject any ism that
places the one before the many…”

We reject it yes but not under those terms. There is too much philosophical ambiguity in that kind of reasoning - ‘the one before the many’ - what the hell does that mean. We’d get lost in arguments about rights and what is ‘deserved’ and so on. Better to avoid this messy waste of time and stick to the initial premise that under the circumstances created by capitalism, it makes sense for the working class to want to control more of the property and profit which they are responsible for creating.

And by ‘makes sense’ we don’t mean history is following some rational dialectic of change that leads necessarily to revolution at some point, and that knowledge of this arises naturally in the class consciousness of workers as society evolves and passes through stages, etc., etc.

That’s too hegelian, keter. No need to deify history to make sense of the idea of sharing ownership of the means of production. It’s a no brainer, keter, if ur a worker and will never own ur own company.

U take over the company u work 4 , kick the owner/boss out, and split his shares up between u and ur co-workers.

A no brainer, keter.

5

People can get fired for not having good hygiene. Being anti soap can get you fired just like being a dirty and possibly contaminated anti vaxxer. It was never about “bodily autonomy” because if they believed in bodily autonomy, they would be fighting for people to not use soap and have as much hygiene problems as they wish, or to have “bodily autonomy” when standing for the pledge of allegiance…

6

Would you be happy to do something that you don’t think is the right thing to do? Of course not. You too want to have your right to act according to your convictions. For the only alternative is to act against them – and that’s irrationality. And who wants to be irrational? Nobody.

If destroying everyone’s lives by not wearing a mask is the rational thing for me to do given my situation than I’d rather do that than be irrational.

I’m sure that applies to everyone – not just me. One’s own rationality is above everything else – even if they are not aware of it.

The worst you can say against these people [the ones who don’t want to wear a mask] is that they are wrong and unintentionally dangerous at best.

Perhaps instead of demonizing them (something you’re quite fond of) you should make an effort to convince them that they are wrong.

7

there is plenty of evidence/facts/science that shows us that
anti-vaxxers are simply wrong…they hold to their anti-vaxxination beliefs
even though the science is quite clear about it… in other words, they aren’t
about listening, but about the clear and present danger they present to
other people, indeed to society itself…

their beliefs are factually, scientifically wrong…and how am I supposed to
talk sense into those for whom facts, evidence, science means nothing?

and these luddites who won’t even listen to science, have made it clear
that they won’t even go halfway into the middle… it is their way or the highway…

and the worse part is their very understanding of government…
they hold that it is ok for the government to dictate to women
they cannot have abortions, and to limit/end gay marriage…
but to require a mask to save lives is a bridge too far…

it is their sheer hypocrisy, that is what is truly frustrating
I can tell you what to do, but you can’t tell me what to do…
is hypocrisy…the rules apply to thee but not to me…that is
what drives their beliefs…and I find their battle to be the
wrong battle at the wrong time… it isn’t government that
threatens our freedoms and rights, it is big business which has
bought the government that is the danger…facebook is a far
greater danger to our rights and liberty, then government ever
was…they are fighting the wrong war…
and like all zealots, they are utterly convinced of their righteousness
and will die for their cause…how does one convinced someone
who is absolutely, convinced of their righteousness?

I don’t know of a way… do you?

Kropotkin

8

By learning how to do it. If they aren’t responding to what someone else (e.g. Dr. Fauci) is saying the same way that you do, you should ask yourself “Why?” Perhaps they see something that you don’t see. Perhaps you see something that they don’t. You actually have to make an effort especially considering the fact that you think their beliefs are dangerous. How is what you’re currently doing better than that? How is restating your beliefs ad nausem better than that? How is demonizing these people on the Internet better than that? You have to actually learn how to interact with people instead of expecting the government to do it for you or for everyone else to bow down to your wishes.

And if they are wrong, as you claim, you have to figure out why and what has to be done in order to change their minds (instead of complaining about them over and over again.)

9

I’m sure that once you have wholeheartedly joined a religion and fully accepted the principle of lying for the cause - it is very difficult to get people to listen to you - and even harder to get yourself to listen to anyone else.

  • Stop lying to everyone
  • Stop lying to yourself
  • Consider that YOU are exactly guilty of everything you just wrote -
  • YOU are the zealot and fanatic that you describe (whether they are or not)
  • YOU are “factually, scientifically wrong” and “utterly convinced of YOUR righteousness” and
  • YOU keep yourself blind to your own guilt (cowards are like that).

Of course YOU are not going to change your blind faith religion - so “they” merely ignore you - as I think they should. It can’t be easy to change the heart of a coward to self-reflect as he endlessly clamors in desperate hope to get everyone to focus elsewhere - “It’s THEM - NOT ME - it’s THEM!!”.

Aren’t you utterly convinced of your righteousness?

Could that be any more obvious?

10

I have, multiple times changed my political position as I
have multiple times, changed my philosophical position…
so which religion do you refer to? Anarchist? I have changed…
moderate democrat? I have changed… communist? I have on
multiple times denounced it… I have even started threads opposing
communism…this change from holding to communism to not, is a fairly
recent one…so given my recent changes in political philosophy,
your very statement is wrong… as you are usually wrong…

so, please tell us, what changes in political or philosophical
positions, have you changed?

as there have been no changes in your political or philosophical
position, your post is far more about you then it is about me…

I have adapted and changed within the environment I now exist in,
but you cannot say the same…recall our friends the dinosaurs…
they couldn’t adapt and change to their changing environment
and they died out…if you can’t change to the environment,
you die… I have changed… have you?

Kropotkin

11

Vamping liars will say anything - convincing no one.

12

Or, their change is more about revisionist dogma then grass roots choice…

13

I was fully vaccinated before Covid. I was anti-trump his first term, but the far left mania pushed me to vote for him the second time. I kinda wonder what the world would look like today if he had won.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible with LIBERTY and JUSTICE for all. This word liberty is very important because mandated vaccines remove it without due consideration for the harm principle (google John Stuart Mill, Warriors!). There is a potential for the vaccine to do harm that is not mitigated by its potential to do good, and thus we must be given a choice. There are also other effective precautions and treatments to mitigate harm while preserving liberty. And we know not all the adverse effects (injuries, deaths) are reported as such. An unjust mandate is no mandate at all. I require exemption. And if you are not requiring testing from all who can become asymptomatic infected, I require exemption from testing, as it is discrimination.

14

K: you are just another one who has no interest in the common good… liberty for
you is a sham because it means liberty only for you… no one else…
exemption from testing isn’t discrimination because it isn’t based on
such ideas as race, religion, sex or sexual orientation, or any other value…
the idea of testing and getting vaccinations is that everyone… EVERYONE
gets it and there is no biases… the basis of exemption from testing or vaccinations
isn’t some vague request to have liberty… because it is ignoring my liberty to
not get covid from some idiot like yourself who can only think of yourself…
what about my freedom or liberty, not to get covid?
Are your liberties or freedoms greater than my liberty or freedom?

Kropotkin

15

Self/Other’s liberty begins/ends where Other/Self’s liberty ends/begins.

If all who can get asymptomatic infected are being tested, then testing is not discrimination. It becomes discrimination when only a subset, those who refuse the vaccine, are tested. The fact that all who refuse the vaccine get lumped in with Trumpers/conservatives and antivaxxers is a dead giveaway it’s about discrimination. See how my last post began.

16

As for safety, if you think the vaccine is so ineffective that your getting the shot is not going to protect you, how am I harming you by agreeing with you and turning down the shot?

17

K: and where have you gotten the impression I am against the vaccine?
I am not… and in fact, I would suggest a very strong argument exists
to make everyone in America get a vaccine… does your freedom,
which is a human construct, be somehow greater than my right to exist?

existence is a primary right of all, ALL beings, whereas freedom, only human
beings can hold to freedom and many in the TRUMP world want to take away
that freedom by this slow-moving coup attempt to take away our basic
democratic right to vote… the Jan 6. coup attempt was an attempt
to take away freedoms from all Americans… whereas your failure to take the shot,
takes away my ability to life… or have you forgotten that over 800,000 Americans
have died from Covid… and worldwide the number is in the millions…

the priority to existence is greater than the priority of freedom…
for the priority of life is a basic priority of evolution…
the goal of existence is simple to pass on your traits to the next generation…
and that is pretty much all there is to existence… there isn’t any great or grand goal
of existence outside of the right to continue to exist…
and your failure to get a vaccination is an attempt to deny me my fundamental
right to existence…or to be it in a slogan… existence before freedom…

to deny this is to deny the basic point of evolution, which is science…
but I am pretty sure you have no problem with that…

Kropotkin

18

If you feel the vaccine is effective to protect you, why does it matter to you whether or not anyone else takes it?

19

Peter K might literally be retarded… don’t bother with him…

20

K: thus relieving one of actually thinking about what I say… the easiest way
to dismiss someone is to call them a name, “commie” “liberal” “Anarchist”
“retarded” it allow one to react to the insult instead of dealing
with the issues that person brings up…

"I don’t have to deal with Kropotkin because he is…“Retarded”…
see how that works…it is really quite a gutless way to dismiss someone…
not only gutless but cowardly…but that is the conservative way, isn’t it?
and I don’t have to deal with those issues by simple dismissing you as
a conservative…

Kropotkin