singer196_Michael CiagloGetty Images_covidvaccine

Por qué vacunarse debería ser obligatorio

Aug 4, 2021 Peter Singer

MELBOURNE – Escribo desde Victoria, el estado australiano que en 1970 se convirtió en la primera jurisdicción del planeta en hacer obligatorio el uso del cinturón de seguridad. Eso fue atacado como una violación a la libertad individual, pero los victorianos lo aceptaron porque salva vidas. Hoy la mayor parte del mundo tiene leyes similares. No puedo acordarme de la última vez que escuché a alguien exigir la libertad de conducir sin cinturón de seguridad.

En lugar de eso, hoy escuchamos exigencias por la libertad de no vacunarse contra las causas de la COVID-19. Brady Ellison, miembro del equipo olímpico estadounidense de tiro con arco dice que su decisión de no vacunarse fue “cien por ciento personal”, insistiendo en que “todo aquel que diga lo contrario está arrebatando las libertades de la gente”.

Lo extraño aquí es que las leyes que nos obligan a usar cinturones de seguridad infringen de manera muy directa nuestra libertad, mientras que las que exigen vacunarse si se va a ir a lugares donde otras personas podrían infectarse restringen un tipo de libertad para proteger la libertad de otros para desplazarse con seguridad.

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world’s leading thinkers, including long reads, book reviews, topical collections, short-form analysis and predictions, and exclusive interviews; every new issue of the PS Quarterly magazine (print and digital); the complete PS archive; and more. Subscribe now to PS Premium.

Peter Singer

Writing for PS since 2001
209 Commentaries

Peter Singer, Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, is Founder of the nonprofit organization The Life You Can Save. His books include Animal Liberation, Practical Ethics, The Ethics of What We Eat (with Jim Mason), Rethinking Life and Death, The Point of View of the Universe, co-authored with Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek, The Most Good You Can Do, Famine, Affluence, and Morality, One World Now, Ethics in the Real World, Why Vegan?, and Utilitarianism: A Very Short Introduction, also with Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek. In April 2021, W.W. Norton published his new edition of Apuleius’s The Golden Ass. In 2013, he was named the world's third "most influential contemporary thinker" by the Gottlieb Duttweiler Institute.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 58 Comments on this article

Theodore D'Afflisio Jan 17, 2022

I don’t understand your argument here as this is precisely what the mandate does. It forces compliance, and even that is too strong as it allowed the alternative of testing and masking, thereby providing an alternative aimed at diminishing community spread and with that harm to others in the workplace. and society in general.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Angelia Mercer Nov 23, 2021

Considering this author has already publicly admitted he does not consider all life valuable or all lives worth living, his advice on this issue is of limited value. How are we to trust his motivations when we do not share his valuation of life? He says he would force so that we do not regret not getting it, but what if the people who haven’t gotten it and regret it because they are now disabled? Once again only certain lives matter to Mr Singer, not all.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Matyas Menyhart Sep 22, 2021

"whereas laws requiring people to be vaccinated if they are going to be in places where they could infect other people are restricting one kind of freedom in order to protect the freedom of others"
Sir I mean not to be argumentative - but where did you get the idea that those who were vaccinated cannot get: 1 infected , 2 infect others. Nowhere in the vaccine did it say - if you get the vaccine you are immune. If it would give immunity it would be a totally different discussion. Also nowhere does it say for now that once you get the vaccine you won't get covid ever. This is nothing like wearing a seatbelt, I can choose not to drive a car, or to sit at the back.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ildiko Iliffe Aug 22, 2021

People who do not wear seatbelts in rear seats are often responsible for the loss of life in the front seat. Drivers and passengers who have to spend their lives in a wheelchair or worse impose a financial and emotional cost on their carers and dependents forever.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ray B Aug 21, 2021

I am 62 years old... Just recovered from COVID infection. Stuffy nose thinking it was allergies ..>Tested positive what? I had been staying away from everyone for the last year, social distancing in stores. No restaurants, no parties nothing. Circle of friends has all had the poke including my entire family. Now my entire vaccinated family has tested positive. My friends who have had the poke are testing positive. Luckily no one ended in the hospital because we take care of ourselves, with diet, exercise, no smoking. I took the antibodies treatment as a follow on treatment. Treatment put me in the hospital but bounced back in a day. The average age of death for COVID is 84 years old.
The entire world is going to get COVID one way or the other. It cannot be stopped. The world will need to deal with it like the annual flu. Oh by the way we had almost zero flu deaths last year. Where did they go? Hummm. Risk is everywhere. You give up your freedom to lower your risk in the end you will always lose your freedoms. The government never gives back what it takes...
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Phillip Goldstein Aug 13, 2021

As they say, the devil is in the details. If a cop gives you a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt you pay a modest fine. Who is going to enforce vaccine mandates? And what is the penalty? Will we mail those who refuse a vaccine?

Will a minimum wage fast food employee risk an altercation by refusing to serve a belligerent customer who refuses to produce proof of vaccination? If you think tensions are high on airplanes nowadays, multiply that by 1000 when large percentages of the population don’t want to get vaccinated!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Aug 12, 2021

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steven Yates Aug 11, 2021

Expanded version of comment posted below, drawing on a few of the other disanalogies between seat belts and Covid vaccines, may be of interest:

http://lostgenerationphilosopher.com/2021/08/10/peter-singer-on-making-covid-vaccines-legally-mandatory/
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Aug 10, 2021

Here's a couple of references to add to the debate:
Number 1.
https://necsi.edu/systemic-risk-of-pandemic-via-novel-pathogens-coronavirus-a-note

The next two references without any hyperlink are citations number 3 and number 5 from the above article on NECSI.edu. Note the titles. Since the lid of Pandora's box has been kicked open without any real thought as to consequences. Have fun, enjoy the results.

N.N. Taleb, R. Read, R. Douady, J. Norman, and Y. Bar-Yam, “The precautionary principle (with application to the genetic modification of organisms),” arXiv preprint arXiv:1410.5787, 2014.

E.M. Rauch and Y. Bar-Yam, “Long-range interactions and evolutionary stability in a predator-prey system,” Physical Review E, vol. 73, no. 2, p. 020903, 2006.

Now, this next link is quite interesting for the organizational structure of the entire corporate entity (as organized, which is a pretty poor quality organizational structure including "short-term goals" so far. There is no apparent "long-term goal" that I could find, not that I'm really looking/researching that hard, or hardly either). Remains to be seen if the monetization process is supportive of just a few of the initial funders' pockets( I would expect so, kinda like Pilgrim Foods and JBS). Woe to the rest of the guinea pigs on all levels/stacks/jabs. Now, at this time, that is the best I can do and remain civil. At this time, it remains to be seen also, if my "context" is sufficiently on-task, and on-subject to stay in my appropriately constrained position as a peanut for the monikers who don't want their toes stepped on.

Number 2.
https://www.baltimoresun.com/coronavirus/bs-hs-kaiser-novavax-20210719-brt4fx5zxffzvkp5x53hqspcgm-story.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Dennis Viliardos Aug 10, 2021

Comparing the seat belt with this vaccine, makes little sense. The mRNA vaccines are still in beta and they will remain in that state for many years, until we can understand the possible long term effects they might have. Just recall how long it took for myocarditis to come out as a side effect. If it was a "classic" vaccine (like the ones we get as children), then I would agree. But this is a vaccine at a testing phase, and businesses are making billions. Pfizer for example had revenue issues prior to the outbreak and is now very profitable again. Guess why. Finally, if you get vaccinated you are supposed to be safe (at least by a large %). So it is really those who oppose vaccination that risk their lifes. Your comparison just makes no sense here
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Thaomas H Aug 10, 2021

Seat belts are a terrible analogy to vaccinations. Seatbelts protect only the person who uses them. The requirement is entirely paternalistic. It's justifiable in the sense that people often appreciate being "forced" to act in their own long-run behalf and against a capricious or short run desire.

Vaccinations are different because becoming vaccinated also benefits the people that the vaccinated person does not infect with a dangerous disease. Vaccinations are MORE justified that a requirement based on paternalism.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Aug 9, 2021

An interesting tidbit of reality today is a nice lady, Citizen of Canada, was refused re-entry into her own country. She had had Covid, tested negative within the last 48 hours, and had antibodies in her body. Oh she even had a letter from a French physician confirming that her anti-bodies were too high to take the "jab" as it could put her at risk of overreactive response from her natural immune system. Apparently only the anti-bodies that reveal antibodies from the patented "vaccines" are acceptable. Seems to me like re-entry, exit etc. will require further medical staffing for immediate response tests based on confirmation that the correct BRAND of antibodies is the only acceptable BRAND for any(???) citizen to have. And, this is of course before any legal confirmation internationally that by-law, national/state, that only the BRANDED products are the only acceptable vaccines and BRAND anti-bodies. Will Zuckerberg and Gates be employing the new "workers" at $15 an hour or less? Of course any corporate entity will be nicely disguised as an independent corporate entity hiring gig-workers, with managers/supervisors/??? from ??? at appropriate higher scale wages based on their well-entitled kingdom. Keep those job numbers up there, even if whatever they get paid won't be enough for their daily food intake. But, then let them eat GMO insects, of course. And recycled and reprocessed water. Now, the present end of the tale that I started with in this passage of narrative is that the nice lady, Citizen of Canada flew back to Europe. I'm sure there's more to that story too.

To top this little story off, just how in the world do the anti-bodies reveal the specific anti-bodies based on the BRAND of the vaccine? What is the differentiating factor for a Pfizer VS a Moderna branded human being? Do they get sorted with an appropriate header above the entry gate at the borders? How about including some more internationally branded products. Just think of all the gates that can be set up and make the sorting almost automatic. No thinking, just following, and doing only what you are told you can do if anything at all.
- Elizabeth Pula Aug 9, 2021
  
  https://www.rt.com/op-ed/531001-canada-kicked-out-vaccine-covid/
  
  It's debatable as to whether this is REAL news, really in the real world. Or is it propaganda? It may in fact really be real and valid. I'm sure there are specific people that you should be able to contact very easily and quickly to confirm validity all the way up the ranks to Canada. Regardless, even hypothetically, the "tale" gives enough information to examine the "scenario" and "consequences" in real terms for real people in their day-to-day existence now. The questions that I have posed are also valid questions based on even a hypothetical scenario. There are supposed to be a few vaccines that are NOT MRNA vaccines that should also be able to be vaccines of choice by any citizen, or even non-citizen globally. What's the matter with a little bit of market sharing in the scenario of vaccine types?
  
  I'm sure you have contacts that should be able to verify top involvement from the European continent also with RTF. Even if Russian, Russians aren't all bad. I even like Helen Blavatsky, at least her writing, of what I have read. I may not have liked her face-to-face. Personality control issues are not what is at stake here, but economies and states, and nations.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Aug 9, 2021

Can't you even wait to push the hype until the FDA at least approves any of the ???
Don't you uphold some legal process as relevant at all? Your messaging is only proving in real time that the present "push" is for totalitarian controls, and most definitely not at all focused on "public health". Don't realize you are only supporting illegal process?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Diego San Jorge Aug 9, 2021

Dear Peter,

I highly doubt that you had put much of your intellect to work on this particular peace. I'm actually surprised on how lax authors can be when it comes to substantiate their views with real evidence.

- I invite you to clarify: where do you get the data to say that “Indonesia is now the epicenter of the virus”? I hope that your source isn't the one sited.

- I also invite you to read about sterilizing immunity vs effective immunity, and how these vaccines are able to stop the virus from causing severe disease but do not stop individuals from being infected or transmitting the virus. So, on which grounds do you want to mandate vaccinating everyone?

- I challenge you to read and elaborate further on the point #9 of the UK Government SAGE 93, that states: “9. There are four major risks associated with high numbers of infections. These are an increase in hospitalisations and deaths, more ‘Long-COVID’; workforce absences (including in the NHS); and the increased risk of new variants emerging. The combination of high prevalence and high levels of vaccination creates the conditions in which an immune escape variant is most likely to emerge. The likelihood of this happening is unknown, but such a variant would present a significant risk both in the UK and internationally”.

I think politicians and their advisors should restrain themselves on trying so hard to “care” for the wellbeing of the average individual, specially when it requires constraining their freedoms.

SAGE 93: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sage-93-minutes-coronavirus-covid-19-response-7-july-2021/sage-93-minutes-coronavirus-covid-19-response-7-july-2021

COVID: Indonesia vs others: https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&facet=none&pickerSort=desc&pickerMetric=new_cases_smoothed_per_million&Metric=Confirmed+cases&Interval=7-day+rolling+average&Relative+to+Population=true&Align+outbreaks=false&country=IND~USA~CHL~GBR~ISR~IDN
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Public Aug 9, 2021

-double post-
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Aug 9, 2021

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steven Yates Aug 8, 2021

Since Professor Singer argues from analogy ... the first disanalogy here is that while some libertarians indeed would say that seat belt wearing should be a personal choice, not a government mandate, presumably no one would claim that wearing one places a person in physical danger, short or long term.

Can the same claim be made for these experimental mRNA vaccines?

I don't know, no one else has convinced me that he/she knows, and that's just the problem. People are refusing the vaccine not to be obstinant or contrary, but because they aren't convinced.

What anyone who looks at the history knows is that normally it takes several years of testing to properly vet a vaccine for safety and effectiveness. These were rolled out in less than six months! I know we're supposed just to trust The Science, which as far as I can tell, is mainly Fauci and his government cronies, a few "science writers" and maybe a few mouthpieces in the Ivy Leagues. There are many doctors and reputable virologists and epidemiologists who question this rushed effort ... in the context of additional questions, entirely appropriate under the circumstances, raised over Fauci's apparently having bankrolled GoF research in the Wuhan lab which seems to be the origin of the coronavirus.

Some will call this "vaccine misinformation." Turn off CNN and turn on your brains! For one thing, there are cures for Covid other than these experimental vaccines, such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. The former is an anti-malarial agent known for 60-odd years to be safe. Suddenly, last year, the drug was demonized by Fauci, his cronies, and The Science. Those prescribing it, usually with great success, were threatened with the loss of their medical licenses. Their evidence was scrubbed from all the major online platforms. All of a sudden, according to The Science, there was no evidence. What was up with that? One study of HCQ was done in the context of its prospects as a preventative / cure for Covid. It was methodologically botched (on purpose?) and had to be withdrawn.

Some will call this a "conspiracy theory." Cut the buzzwords! Anyone who doesn't realize that there is more to this pandemic than meets the eye (or is reported in major media) doesn't WANT to realize it.

We come back to: the analogy Singer draws between seat belts, known quantities, and these Covid-19 vaccines, the long term effects of which are a complete black hole. His analogy disintegrates when we put it under the spotlight and look at it in detail. (And incidentally, how many patents do Fauci and his cronies, which include Bill Gates who isn't a doctor or a scientist, have on vaccines generally, on which they have all made huge sums of money?? There are conflicts of interest all over the place here, and it should astound us that someone touted as one of the major moral philosophers of our era would simply overlook this!)

Steven Yates has a PhD in philosophy and is the author of What Should Philosophy Do? A Theory (Wipf & Stock, 2021).
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Enrique Woll Battistini Aug 8, 2021

August 4, 2021

THIS IS AND MUST BE THE PRIMAL TASK AND DUTY OF THE U.S. TO THE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD, FROM FOURTH WORLD TO FIRST WORLD, ESPECIALLY THE POOREST 🙂

Note on July 4, 2020 : Given the threats posed by Global Warming and the Anthropogenic input accelerating it, and by the Global COVID-19 Pandemic, in the face of a rudderless Government in the U.S., and the resulting calamitous Global Economic Crash that is currently unfolding, with mass hunger and illness to be expected at this time and for the foreseeable future, it has become evident that drastic Development Proposals on a Global Scale will have to be conceived and implemented without delay. This is and must be the primal task and duty of the U.S. to the Peoples of the World, from Fourth World to First World, especially the poorest, given the enormous Development it has garnered for the so-called American People since its founding, with the incessant and stolid participation of these very same peoples. This is one such proposal: Mathematical Model and Simulation for "A Partnership for Development with the United States of America", at no cost to the U.S., but great profit, that would articulate Private Sector and Public Sector entities pertinent to environmentally-friendly holistic socioeconomic development in the American Hemisphere, bringing together its 35 nations, in a concerted effort to reduce and eliminate the existing Ominous Welfare Gap, led by the Private Sector, for profit. This very same scheme can be implemented on a North-South basis, not only in the Americas, but in Europe Africa, and Asia Oceania. Model and Simulation developed in Excel in 1999, and subjected to its subsequent versions through Excel 2003 and its updates through 2014. Some macros may not work appropriately today.

https://www.academia.edu/.../Mathematical_Model_and...

A cursory analytical look at Thomas Piketty's Thesis clearly suggests that the intrinsic nature of Capitalism ensures that the rich will get richer and the poor poorer, ad infinitum, till annihilation of the poorest, in any society in any country, unless taxation through a sole consumption tax is used to regularly redistribute the wealth created in all societies, within societies, in such a way as to preempt consumption by the poorest from falling below the threshold of autonomous survival with monotonically increasing welfare potential, that would bring their share of wealth consumption irreversibly and asymptotically closer to consumption by the richest of the rich over time. This condition would not imply equality, only the trend to equality, but when perceptible, would ensure the possibility of harmonious socioeconomic development and peace. Absolute extreme poverty as well as relative extreme poverty would be eradicated, and planetary rescue could then be pursued, essentially through voluntary population stabilization, production and consumption stabilization, and carbon emissions stabilization.

https://www.academia.edu/.../Informal_Proof_of_Thomas...

At the crux of world peace, and planetary rescue, would be tax reform, via Sole Consumption Tax (SCT), that would enable eradication of absolute extreme poverty and relative extreme poverty, through regular income redistribution ensuring the attainment of autonomous survival with increasing welfare potential for the poorest, that would irreversibly approach that of the richest, voluntary population stabilization, voluntary production and consumption stabilization, and carbon emissions stabilization.

https://www.academia.edu/.../La_Reforma_Tributaria_del...

The capitalization imbalance between the northern hemisphere, and the southern hemisphere, developed countries and the underdeveloped, and between OECD countries and the rest, suggests that something may be failing in the capital markets’ capacity to arbitrate investments: It would seem that it does not function effectively, and that the not so uncommon perception of increasing relative backwardness of the Third World is true. If so, beyond investigating its causes, it is necessary to investigate the attributes, achievements, and plans of existing multilateral and governmental poverty eradication and economic development organizations, and of their private counterparts, and the regulatory environment, in order to determine the need and opportunity for the creation of new private-public systems to increase the north-south investments rate.

https://www.academia.edu/.../WOLL_THE_ROLE_OF_INVESTMENT...

***

The Sting in COVID-19’s Tail

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/world/2021-01-26/sting-covid-19s-tail?utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2bLFswY_ZWpeQwbUquSilCfp5eAShpOtrdLSFz4lFH0gntNBjUTIbByyc
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
NF Anderson Aug 8, 2021

In a conversation yesterday with my wife on this issue I produced the following comment.... "Of course I think its nutty for people to not be vaccinated, but if you look at the map of the current outbreak - which is the map of the unvaccinated - it is the map of the old South." This is the group of people who are deeply suspicious of Washington (and of the North), and have been for 150+ years. For people not born in that region, either immigrants or people educated in the North, this is either an irrelevant or a crazy observation, but for someone educated in the South it is something else, it is interesting... Just look at the map. If I were President Biden I would enlist Southerners with national credibility to drive a vaccination effort - movie stars, athletes, politicians, writers, people from the South. Again, crazy talk for people from the North, but if you stop explaining the map as a product of ignorance or stupidity, what do you have left?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Daniel Kyba Aug 8, 2021

Freedom and accountability are opposite sides of the same coin. One cannot have one without the other. If you choose not to wear a seat belt - fine. But good luck getting private sector personal injury overage. The insurer will insist that you take reasonable precautions protecting yourself such as driving within posted speed limits, not under the influence of drugs or alcohol and yes - wearing a seatbelt. Many jurisdictions, such as here in Canada, provide comprehensive universal medical coverage, and as such have not only the right, but the responsibility to ensure that people wear seatbelts.

The same logic applies to Covid vaccinations. Here though, societal consequences are greater. If you choose not to vaccinate - fine. But this is a communicable disease and you are responsible for the sickness and death you bring upon others. Even in situations where there is no comprehensive medical coverage, government still has an obligation to ensure everyone is vaccinated.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ralou Eneas Aug 8, 2021

The author completely dismisses studies and empirical data showing that vaccinated and unvaccinated people present similar viral loads, thus making them equally contagious. I would like to read an updated version of his commentary, especially the section about responsibility towards or protection of others, including this important result. It shouldn't be ignored anymore in this kind of discussion.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Stennicke Aug 8, 2021

this is potentially betting the human race if we are off on delayed risks however well meant; we just dont know. Read Larry Sanger's piece : https://larrysanger.org/2021/08/the-astonishing-hubris-of-a-global-experimental-vaccine/
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steve Gokorsch Aug 8, 2021

I cannot understand how anyone can equate a seat belt law with an injection. Pure nonsense.

Here in Ohio, you can choose NOT to wear your seat belt and will not be stopped by the police. IF however you are stopped for a traffic violation they will note if you had a belt on. FWIW my classic cars do not have seat belts.

If a company decides NOT to allow employees who are unvaccinated to work that is their choice...but I'm sure it will end up in court. State health departments used to require children to be vaccinated for MMR before attending school. I am not certain if this is enforced today...maybe someone with young children can comment.

p.s. You cannot find a smallpox vaccine today...unlike in the past when we all were vaccinated.
- John Alexander Aug 11, 2021
  
  "I cannot understand how anyone can equate a seat belt law with an injection. Pure nonsense." Yes, such an equation would indeed be nonsense, but where have you come across it?
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Curtis Carpenter Aug 8, 2021
  
  Combine an inability to deal with complexity, a widespread hermeneutics of suspicion, a "me first ("America first") culture and an epidemic of Dunning-Kreuger effect -- and one is only surprised that there are so FEW "antivaxxers" here in the U.S..
  - Steve Gokorsch Aug 8, 2021
    
    Curtis living here in our diverse nation, with all the different religions and cultures rubbing against each other to ME it appears we deal with Social complexity fairly well. Now I will agree our form of government is messy, and that is by design. If we wanted everyone to simply follow government direction the Framers would have created a dictatorship or monarchy.
    
    EVERY nation should (and does) put the welfare of their citizens first.
    
    Most people I know are not naturally suspicious, but there are a few, educated and reasonable people I know who are concerned about injecting a newly designed type of vaccine. If you listen to the national news we hear story after story of negative reactions and possible death. Seldom do we hear the actual statistics in the Media's emotionally charged stories. "Back to you Lester..."
    The Media is NOT helping us.
    - Curtis Carpenter Aug 8, 2021
      
      Don't you think it would be more accurate and more realistic to set aside the platitude and say that every state puts the welfare of some segment of its citizens first?
      
      The vaccine offers an example. MY welfare would be advanced if YOU would get vaccinated. So who gets to decide that your tribe's notion of welfare trumps mine? In less personal terms: who defines "welfare" for the state's citizens?
      
      A Syrian refugee or a North Korean escapee might have some interesting thought to offer on such "common knowldge."
      
      As to dealing with complexity and loss of trust, let me encourage you to read "What's behind the "crisis of democracy" here at PS if you haven't already done so (noting in particular the brief on Schäfer and Zürn).
      - Steve Gokorsch Aug 8, 2021
        
        Actually States (capital S) put the welfare of their citizens ahead of people living elsewhere. Agreed some citizens are given a higher priority (as we do here in the US with our quotas).
        
        MY loss of trust in Government is based on my lifetime of seeing the results. Remember the "Great Society"? How did that work out. How about AFDC? Has HUD done anything? Even the CDC fell down on their primary charter.
        
        As far as reading is concerned Milton Friedman's "Why Government is the Problem" is a must read. Thomas Sowell also has a number of good books on the subject. And: the "Crisis in Democracy" was foreseen by our Founders. Hillsdale College offers free courses which will better explain their dilemma. To me it is amazing that democratic governments last as long as they do.
        
        Curtis Carpenter Aug 8, 2021
        
        So many of us wallow in mistrust of government, yet expect our toilets to flush, our water to be reasonably pure, our meat to be untainted, our buildings not to collapse on our heads and our justice system to at least try to minimize the crime in our neighborhoods. All with the occasional exception, of course.
        
        Of course, we're all "Free to Choose." LOL
        
        Steve Gokorsch Aug 9, 2021
        
        My toilets flush because I hired a reputable plumber. My water is pure because I have a private well, as do all of my neighbors. My house is structurally sound because of the work of both the architect and the Amish builders. (they do great work)
        
        And as far as policing is concerned, where we live now we have great police. They can be seen day after day patrolling the streets.
        
        However where I grew up in the city, you could a find the police car parked outside a local bar - at least we knew where to call. And if you had the misfortune to get into an automobile accident (as I did) you find that YOU must drive to the police station to file a hit-and-run report. We locked our cars inside of our locked garages...and they still were stolen. Hmm.
        
        My grandfather was a police detective for 25 years (25 and out). I have always respected police and see them in a totally different (and positive) light than bureaucrats and professional politicians.
        
        Curtis Carpenter Aug 9, 2021
        
        Sure.
        
        Aug 9, 2021
        
        This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jonathan Lemieux Aug 8, 2021

Car seatbelts and similar automobile safety systems have been developed over the past half century+. Not ONE of these covid drugs has FDA approval, merely emergency use authorization. Most vaccines take years, if not decades to be engineered, tested, and put into use. This one has been done in MONTHS! Seriously, stop and think about that for a moment.

Let me be clear, I understand how desperately people want to return to normal. And I believe that the vaccine does help. I believe that masks help. I've taken a lot of heat from conservatives for defending those who choose to wear masks/get the shot. And I'll continue to call out those who harass mask wearers, or mindlessly claim the drug makes people sterile. Likewise, I will call out those on the exact opposite side of the spectrum. The idea that we should mandate entire countries to take a non FDA approved drug is the height of stupidity, period.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Andres Gujan Aug 6, 2021

A compulsory vaccination violates the human right of bodily integrity, a compulsory seat belt doesn't.
- Lester Soss Aug 7, 2021
  
  Where do you stand on women's reproductive rights?
  - Aug 8, 2021
    
    This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
    - Lester Soss Aug 8, 2021
      
      There are two responses to my comments that I think violate Project Syndicate's rules of maintaining civil discourse.
      
      Mr. Klamath, uses an invidious comparison and an ad hominen speculation on my motives for my question to Andre Gujan of what position he took on a woman's right to chose. It is a relevant question because Gujan argues that there is a right to "bodily integrity" and I wondered how far that belief extended.
      
      The comment though was itself a secondary one. My primary comment was to posit the idea that freedom was a two-sided coin. I'm not sure if Mr. W is alluding to that comment or my question when he wrote, "...Unfortunately, some people use comments to poke people like a ninth grader with topics outside of the article. I guess they think it's clever".
      
      Again, neither civil nor relevant. I would ask that Project Syndicate reintroduce their "flagging" policy and let an editorial board decide.
      
      I will add one additional comment. I have tried to be civil in my arguments with anti-vaxxers, but with 610,000 dead and a resurgence of the disease among the unvaccinated, I share the sentiments and frustration expressed by the conservative governor of Alabama Kay Ivey, "...it's the unvaccinated folks who are causing the problem."
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  - Tom W Aug 8, 2021
    
    The comments section is meant to focus on the argument and analysis presented in the article. Unfortunately, some people use comments to poke people like a ninth grader with topics outside of the article. I guess they think it's clever.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Joe Turner Aug 5, 2021

Why do I keep having this feeling that leftists are desperate to force people to take this vaccine as a first step in teaching us to just get used to being pushed around? And these little stories about the relatives and dying patient crying out for the vaccine are pathetic. They remind me of self serving Stalin type lying.

I got the vaccine because I was essentially extorted into it by family members. Now, I’ll fight leftists to the end if anyone thinks he can force me to get yet another shot or cooperate in any way with their political plans. Yes, you read correctly, political plans.
- Lester Soss Aug 5, 2021
  
  There are two issues here. The first is what is the science behind the vaccination. Mr. Turner overlooks this and instead focuses on what he takes to be the politics of it. As he puts it, "...leftists are desperate to force people to take this vaccine as a first step in teaching us to just get used to being pushed around." His evidence of this is an implicit appeal to the "slippery slope". He provides no other evidence.
  
  The second issue, again ignored by Mr. Turner is the issue of responsibility. This is the flip side of the freedom coin. I may choose not to be vaccinated, as I may choose to drive when drunk, but that choice doesn't exempt from being held accountable for that choice. If I kill someone when drunk, not only will I be charged and imprisoned, but I will also be sued by the relatives. Furthermore, no insurance company will be obligated to pay the judgements.
  
  The same holds true, or should hold true for those who refuse to be vaccinated. If Mr. Turner infects someone else, then he should be personally liable for damages. Furthermore, if he is hospitalized and treated for a covid infection, he should have to bear the full cost of that hospitalization. The insurance company or the state should not have to cover those costs.
  
  I would have a little more respect for the anti-vaxxers if they were willing to sign a document that indemnifies the hospital and state for their costs. As I remember it, the Trump campaign required just such a document for anyone attending Trump's maskless rallies.
  - Steven Yates Aug 8, 2021
    
    I would have more respect for pro-vaxxers if the corporate leviathans comprising the multibillion-$$$$ pharmaceuticals cartel were not indemnified LEGALLY from lawsuits for harm done by the substances they've been foisting on an increasingly skeptical public.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  - Steven Yates Aug 8, 2021
    
    I would have more respect for pro-vaxxers if the leviathan corporations comprising the multibillion-$$$$ pharmaceuticals cartel were not LEGALLY indemnified from lawsuits for harm done by the substances they've been foisting on an increasingly skeptical public.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Darren Krommenhock Aug 5, 2021

In addition to some of the points others brought up there are several more.
Mr Singer may be aware of what the Australian laws are as well as the policies but ... technically Australia does not have the same Bill of Rights as the US does.

The Australian parliament could limit Mr. Singer's speech by itself with no Judicial overview.
In the US, the Supreme Court would have the last call. And since technically the Vaccine's are "emergency" authorized, and not cleared through the full FDA process. No the government can not mandate it. Not even local governments or school boards. And we will see that test soon if the Secretary of Defense does mandate vaccines for all Soldiers. Because we have a lot of case law about using "experimental" or "Emergency" medication on soldiers ( something that used to be done to get a pool of "volunteers for data to get full clearance and is now described as a crime against humanity ).

Also, the Seat belt laws in the US were passed to limit the costs of uninsured victims both medically and automobile wise.
Since then, we have made medical insurance mandatory and auto insurance mandatory to keep your license.
Those laws could be considered "stale" in the U.S. due to the intent behind the laws are no longer valid. Seat Belt laws in the U.S. may not actually survive a legal challange ( I think they would but it would be close -- and the plaintiffs would have their day in court and not have a summary decision ).

So put briefly, Mr. Singer's views have some validity -- but they are not easily spread across all nations and all legal systems. AS such, it is just his opinion. And the opposite opinion from his might win in some nations.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Bernhard Kopp Aug 5, 2021

Considering the short period of time the new vaccines have been around, it is just laughable to demand a mandatory vaccination. The seat-belt-comparison is outright ridiculous. The seat-belt never goes into my immune system with unknown effects, unknown efficacy und unknown long-term effects. I do consider the risk of an infection greater than the risk of the vaccines - I am fully vaccinated, and I will not mind a booster shot if recommended - but I would not accept a mandated vaccination to the Supreme Court. Show me the peer-reviewed scientific studies of large samples, and over 3-5 years.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Tom Shapiro Aug 4, 2021

From Hobbes to Rousseau and beyond, political philosophy has tried to define how to balance the rights of the individual citizen with the rights of “The People” as a community.
In broad brush analysis this distilled down to the idea of an implicit social contract whose articles allow the society of voluntary members to coexist in peace and to still enjoy a life of privacy based on their own beliefs and decisions.
But what happens when rights of individuals and rights of his community conflict? Neither the aggregate community—society— nor the individual who has limited personal autonomy and agency have the means to adjudicate their conflict.
That is the responsibility of the sovereign government placed above both the individual and the community.
Hobbes and Lock understood that without a Sovereign government to maintain a balance and to enforce its judgments nobody’s rights were enforceable. Members then reverted to a state of nature of all against all.
Sooner or later legitimate coercion by the sovereign government may be required to maintain the balance between community and individual. Such is the case with vaccination.
When an effective and safe vaccine exists to protect all individuals and when near universal vaccination is mandatory to protect the entire community, to argue that however effective and safe the vaccine is , government mandate to vaccinate is still illegitimate is to admit that the community has no right to compel behavior in individuals in order to preserve itself. Socrates had a term for such political philosophers. He villified them as Sophists.
- mrboz21 Aug 5, 2021
  
  Fine. As soon as you can show me the longitudinal data that shows the multi-year impact of these vaccines. And while you're at it, why is data and research that shows the immunity conferred by recovering from the virus being ignored? Couple this with the fact that infected people are being imported from South America, it seems clear that the goal here is not public health.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.