And that's why governments managed to kill over a hundred million people in the past century, because they convinced people it was for some "Greater good".
A completely separate problem. If you're not grounded in reality, it doesn't matter if you're operating in a deontological or consequentialist mode. You can justify bad outcomes with either.
The mindset of fear that is inculcated that pits one group against another is the similarity that starts it off.
1940s Germany: Germans were convinced that Jews were the outer, not deserving of protection
20th century communism, too many examples - China, Russia, Cambodia, etc : Different classes - writers, teachers, scientists were identified as the outer group, and hate was inculcated
Today's scenario: the 'unvaccinated' are made as the other group.
That’s not a particularly good analogy. The persecution of the Jews by Nazis was based on immutable characteristics (such as whether or not one’s grandparents were Jewish). Likewise, if you had built a career as an intellectual, teacher or urban professional in Phnom Penh in the 1970s, you couldn’t suddenly turn around and pretend to be a peasant to avoid persecution. Even being short-sighted and wearing glasses was enough to be marked as an enemy of the Khmer Rouge regime.
Choosing not to be vaccinated is not an immutable characteristic. It’s a behavioural choice and a better analogy would be choosing to drink and drive – behaviour that is rightly frowned upon by most of society.
'Drinking and driving' is not a good analogy either.
There is no one that argues that 'drinking and driving' is good for anyone at all.
OTOH, regarding vaccines, there are so many different human conditions, side effects and issues seen with vaccines that it is fair to be skeptical.
The other big factor is the time that has elapsed, and different folks have different levels of comfort.
All of this being brushed aside - to identify a group of folks to crush -- is the evil being discussed.
---
that they are immutable or not is quibbling, in my opinion.
Using the Khmer Rouge, the system decapitated the intellectuals not because they are learned, but because they had the ability to think and decide for themselves.
Now, in the US, I argue, that people who chose to think differently are being targeted, with the carrot being provided that they can change...
Is this not coercion? There is a line between persuasion and coercion, and very clearly, it has been crossed.
