I’ve noticed a disturbing pattern among many individuals within the health choice movement, specifically the vaccine choice movement, of taking a too-preoccupied interest in the health choices of others. Ironically so. They see people drinking diet coke, or eating McDonald’s, or failing to live up to their own standard of a healthy lifestyle, and thus they teeter far too close to advocating for the government to bring its heavy hand in to rectify these “incorrect” health choices.
So here is a quick restatement of the fundamental axiom and goal of liberty as I’ve interpreted it. It’s nothing more than an extension of voluntary interaction between consenting adults as far and wide as possible throughout society. It is a recognition that adults can make their own decisions, and when they do so, they make the world a better place. It might be hard or impossible to see how someone’s drinking of Diet Coke could possibly help to make the world a better place, so here is a trick to getting around it: aim that judgmental attitude at the person in the mirror. The only way possible to improve society is to improve yourself. Also to defend the right of every adult to make their own decisions, to legalize every interaction or transaction between consenting adults. Recognize that a government powerful enough to make health decisions for you can also decide whether to inject you and your children with poison.
I’m sure its offensive to some to see others eating what they consider “junk” food, making lifestyle choices that appear to lead to a ruinous dead end. But this attitude, one that spends far too much time dwelling on the personal conduct of others, is inimical to a free society. It’s a short walk from that, to drumming up support for restrictive legislative measures that help no one at all, but apparently assist the self-righteous sleep more soundly.
For liberty to become sustainable in any degree, a cultural change must occur. Specifically, it should be considered indecent to dwell too long, or take too a perverse interest in, the personal habits or nuances of others.
“Do what thou wilt, shall be the whole of the law.” No Thelemite here, but I can’t help but think that Crowley independently arrived at the fundamental axiom of a free society. A tolerance of the differences of others is essential. This doesn’t mean you must interact with them in any way, but advocating for the State to intervene and force a desired outcome, should be looked upon as vulgar.
This state of affairs is understandably frustrating to the multitude of busybodies among us, straining at the leash to “do something”. We all have that primitive busybody within us to some degree, but in order to evolve into something better it must be shackled.
