How Coronavirus is being used to dismantle our civil rights.
Miss Doozy
Apr 6, 2021
5 min read
Updated: Nov 24, 2022
I'd like to preface this by stating that all sources are provided at the bottom of the page; these were used in my research and in drawing conclusions.
While one realises that some refute the possibility of the existence of the virus, one personally believes within its credibility. However skewed the numbers may be, one highly doubts that scientists would be part of a bigger scheme, a conspiracy theory of sorts, if you will, in order to simply remove our civil liberties. While I recognise that this virus has had detrimental effects worldwide, within the UK in particular, one finds it to have become a cover to dismantle our civil rights.
I'd like to begin by addressing the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021, which has increased the maximum sentence from 3 months to 10 years for criminal damage to a memorial. This is completely preposterous, since the average sentence for rape is 8 years. Is our incarceration system that fragile, that someone faces more time for defacing a statue than raping someone? It clearly seems so. Also present in this transgressive bill is the essential prevention of protesting; it is stated that if a protest causes "serious public disorder, serious damage to property or serious disruption to the life of the community", then protestors shall be criminalised. Moreover, peaceful protestors are also at risk of being criminalised, as the vague classification of a “public nuisance” will soon be considered a criminal offence. This essentially infringes on our right to the freedom of expression, which Priti Patel seems to be supporting all the more. Attempting to pass this bill during a time in which protests are being criminalised due their very nature, as displayed by the surrounding the context of our times (pandemic restrictions, and supposed selfishness of risking lives to freely demonstrate) was obviously a well-thought out move. Protests are increasingly being seen as threatening democracy, when they are the complete opposite; a total demonstration of democracy due to the open display of the freedom of expression. It's clear that the current British government is afraid of displays of democracy, probably due to their own internal instabilities.
I'd also like to address the ethicality of "vaccine passports". In the past, we may have had to provide evidence of certain vaccinations we've received, and obviously, our respective medical histories are at the hands of medical professionals. However, the very nature of these passports, which will effectively restrict our right to freedom of movement, alongside the possible implementation of the principle of 'no jab no job' seems entirely ridiculous. Vaccine hesitancy has been pushed from being a natural reaction, to being one filled with selfishness which will lead to a dramatic hubristic demise. It seems to be largely forgotten that British society has been identified to follow an individualistic culture, not a collectivist one. Furthermore, vaccine hesitancy is most prevalent in non-white ethnic minorities, and it seems to be completely ignored that these 'vaccine passports', may well soon progress into a race-fuelled civil war.
While companies and corporations are able to judge for themselves whether to implement these passports' usage, as long as they don't breach the Equality Act, it seems entirely irresponsible to simply expect anyone to trust them. Especially since this vaccine hesitancy stems from systemic racism and discrimination, these passports will surely only increase mistrust within the governmental system, since ethnic minorities will therefore also be less likely to secure jobs, due to the acceptability of "no jab, no job". There is also the question raised as to whether vaccinating is a civic duty, or a choice. While these vaccines are essentially being mandated, since one may not be able to secure a job, simply enter a supermarket, or even travel, it's disregarded that this is a basic infringement of our rights. Albeit it's a global pandemic, and there are bound to be restrictions and general panic, but essentially forcing the larger part of society to insert a foreign substance into their own body still seems unethical.
Obviously, there's a divide between medical and ethical opinion on the introduction of immunisation policies; some countries criminalise the refusal of vaccines, however, despite the vaccine not being mandated in the UK, or criminalised for the refusal of one, why does it seem so taboo to be mistrustful of it? There appears to be a wave of encouragement, to the point of manipulation, for one to get the COVID-19 vaccine, and this completely disregards deaths directly caused by the vaccine. For example, recently, 7 people died from 'unusual blood clots' after getting the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine in the UK. Although I realise that an extremely small amount of people have developed these clots; 30 out of 18 million, concerns have led to other countries such as Germany, France, the Netherlands and Canada to restricting the vaccine's use to only older people. While it's unknown whether this was a coincidence, or a genuine side effect, it's only increased my mistrust in any COVID-19 vaccine; also due to the 23 deaths of elderly patients who received the vaccine in Norway. While some websites are correct to mention 460 deaths and 243,612 reactions supposedly being a direct cause of the vaccine, they are wrong to suggest these are definitely caused by the vaccine. However, I refuse to believe that these are simply coincidences, alongside the suspicious blood clots.
I simply want to understand why these deaths, or incidents, which may be directly caused by the vaccine, are occurring. I detest the idea of anyone being labelled a bigot for simply questioning the efficacy of this vaccine, because it should be anything but normal to be so eager and blindly trusting to want to take the coronavirus vaccine. My point being, why trust the government if none of the Johnson administration have had the vaccine themselves. Although I will accept that there has been much "anti-vaxxer" sentiment for this vaccine, largely due to fake news, such as the idea that Albert Bourla was refusing to take his own vaccine, my concerns remain genuine. Obviously, I do understand the basic biological workings of a vaccine, but I will continue question the efficacy and genuineness of this vaccine. Furthermore, if I cannot be guaranteed complete immunity, or any dangerous, life-threatening side effects from this vaccine, why should I put myself at risk by taking it? If one were to ask the GP administering my vaccine whether they'd take responsibility; be liable for any damage to my health as a direct cause of the vaccine, then they'd outright refuse to administer it to me. So who's responsible for all the deaths caused by the vaccines? The government certainly won't take responsibility, and the creators of the vaccine seem to think they've done their job by providing a small leaflet explaining the possible side effects, and if one were to deem them responsible, they'd claim that one who was prepared to take the vaccine, was also prepared to take the risks it poses.
Overall, one finds that even though the coronavirus has impacted everyone's daily lives, and has taken many lives, it's being used as a cover for the government to erode our basic civil liberties, which seems entirely too frightening.
Comments