I had a draft sitting in my folder with a nicely laid out argument against government mask mandates. But this blog is supposed to focus on images. Therefore I condensed my argument into four images with four simple arguments and a small conclusion. It requires you doing some research and thinking on your own and it is a bit of an experiment. And finally masks are just the example for this argument, it can be applied to other kinds of government action as well. Let’s go.
Four arguments – Four pictures
1. Government says that masks can provide a benefit but no proper protection. How much benefit seems not yet clear. Studies are conflicting. The agnostic stance says that there is some benefit
2. Masks create not only costs but also harms. How much harm seems not yet clear. We have little experience with long-term mask wearing. The agnostic stance says that there is some harm.
3. Free and democratic government shall not impose harms on innocent people no matter the benefit. Free and democratic governments may only impose costs on innocent people.
4. Therefore mask mandates enforced by law are unethical. This still allows citizens to wear them. It also allows that private organizations may demand mask wearing on their premises. People are then free to comply or avoid.
If you disagree with #1 and think that masks are very effective the argument still holds. If you disagree with #2 and think masks are harmless you are naive. If you disagree with #3 and think that some benefits justify the harm you are a dangerous utilitarian, your reasoning would have support the most gruesome horrors in history. If you disagree with #4 you are a collectivist who forgot thousands of years of Judeo-Christian thinking and tradition.
Tell me what you think of this experiment, if you agree or not. I am curious.