Noam Chomsky's Vaccination Proposal: Separation from Society – Is It a Sign of Individual Action or Fascism?

Noam Chomsky, the renowned linguist and philosopher, recently suggested that the unvaccinated should be separated from society. Given his age and experience, many have questioned whether this proposal could be a veiled form of fascism. Let's explore Chomsky's suggestion, its implications, and whether it aligns with concepts of fascism.

The Genesis of Chomsky's Suggestion

Noam Chomsky, now 93, made this controversial statement in an interview, suggesting that society should forcibly separate those who refuse to get vaccinated. The fact that he is 93 before making such a suggestion signifying a change in his views raises some concerns. Personally, I can relate to his situation and seek advice on how to avoid becoming a grumpy old man. However, such proposals invite a deeper examination of their nature and implications.

Fascism and State Control

The suggestion to separate the unvaccinated from society is often compared to fascism. Yet, this comparison is misplaced. Under fascism, the state enforces severe restrictions on individual freedoms, often through illegal actions. In contrast, Chomsky’s suggestion reflects a call for societal norms and possible exclusion rather than state coercion.

The Case of Republican Governor Ron DeSantis

To illustrate the difference, consider the stance of Republican Governor Ron DeSantis, who made it illegal for schools to enact mask mandates. His actions are a clear example of fascism, as he overrides individual choices and imposes his ideals on the public domain.

The Nature of Chomsky's Suggestion

Noam Chomsky's call for the separation of unvaccinated individuals from society does not align with the strict enforcement characteristic of fascism. Instead, it suggests a more plausible view of individual responsibility and public health. Chomsky’s view is grounded in the idea that unvaccinated individuals pose a risk to public health and should be aware of the consequences.

The Common Cold and Virus Evolution

To understand the nature of viruses and their evolution, let's consider the common cold, caused by various rhinoviruses and coronaviruses. These viruses are designed to reproduce and spread, but they do not do so in a way that kills their hosts quickly. This is because rapid killing of the host reduces the virus’s ability to spread. Thus, most viruses tend to become less virulent as they mutate.

The Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines

The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing infection versus severe illness is a contentious topic. According to data from Imperial College and the Office of National Statistics, these vaccines are estimated to have an efficacy rate of around 40-60%. This means they do not provide the kind of protection against infection that some may have hoped for. Moreover, the emergence of variants like Delta and Omicron suggests that the vaccines may become increasingly less effective over time.

Chomsky's Proposal and Public Health

Noam Chomsky’s proposal that unvaccinated individuals should be separated from society is based on the idea that they pose a risk to public health. This view aligns with the principle that individuals should be responsible for their actions and the potential consequences they may have on others. However, the effectiveness of such a proposal in practice is debatable. While initial indications suggest that Omicron causes milder symptoms, the ongoing spread and potential for further mutations underscore the need for a nuanced approach to public health policies.

Conclusion

Chomsky's suggestion of separating the unvaccinated from society is rooted in the recognition of individual responsibility and the protection of public health. It does not align with the strict enforcement characteristic of fascism but rather reflects a more nuanced view of individual and societal well-being. As we navigate the ongoing challenges of the pandemic, it is important to consider all viewpoints and find balanced solutions that prioritize both individual freedom and public health.