Choices Not all Equal
- Chocolate or vanilla ice-cream.
- Bedtime at 10 or midnight, but get up at 6am.
- Wear the red dress or black pants and and a cream top.
- Get blind drunk on two bottles of wine or just have a glass.
- Take two jabs of a vaccine to get a passport with societal privileges.
Coercion to ensure the correct choice
You have a choice, says the torturer to their victim. Tell us what we want to know and the pain will stop - it's your choice.
You have a choice, says the fanatical religious zealot back in the days when conversion was forced. Convert to our religion and you can be part of the new society - it's your choice.
You have a choice, says the communist to each ordinary person. Take on our ideology or be purged - it's your choice.
You have a choice, says the NZ Government to each person who is not fully vaccinated, with two jabs as of this writing. Submit to the jabs, download the passport and your freedoms will be given back to you - it's your choice.
Discrimination on Choice
There is no discrimination if there is a choice, according to at least one Labour MP and many media influencers on the left side of politics.
It is implied that the choice is so inconsequential, the remedy is so trivial, then how could it possibly be discrimination if a person loses their job or is denied entry to a cafe?
Surely, all the person has to do is make a different choice and any apparent discrimination disappears. Choose differently and your world comes back to you. If a person can choose to make it all go away, there cannot possibly be any discrimination for those who have not yet chosen correctly. This is how discrimination is justified for the person with a troubled conscience.
It is rationalised that each person experiencing discrimination is able to remedy that problem with a simple choice. Snap your fingers and the discrimination melts away. The person being discriminated against is doing it to themselves.
Therefore the discrimination on the part of the discriminator cannot exist as it can be negated by a simple choice by the discriminated to stop the discrimination against themselves.
When a choice seems trivial it can be very difficult to empathise with the difficulty experienced by others who don't consider the choice and the consequence of that choice to be trivial. Thus creating a major disconnect for those who have absorbed the messaging on there being no discrimination if there is a choice.
Maybe peanut butter is a good example to use to try and explain. For a person that likes peanut butter, it's trivial to choose to have it. For a person who is not keen on peanut butter but is given an option of peanut butter or no food, they will choose to have the peanut butter because something is better than nothing. However, for a person that is allergic to peanut butter, then the choice of peanut butter or no food becomes extremely non-trivial.
It's irrelevant to the allergic person that the first person found choosing to have the peanut butter trivial and a choice. Yet if the first person is oblivious to the allergic person's major problems with the peanut butter and decides that just offering peanut butter is an acceptable choice because it was an acceptable choice for them, we have the same mental disconnect at work as we do regarding the vaccination for Covid-19.
Sure, not everyone that is refusing to get vaccinated is like the person allergic to peanut butter, but that is not the point of the comparison. The point of the comparison is to show the extreme point of view exhibited by the person that considers the choice trivial if it were applied to another situation.
Don't justify the discrimination against those who aren't eligible for a passport of privilege by saying it's just a choice. It shows you are thoughtlessly parroting propaganda designed to ease your conscience so that you can do the work of the regime in implemented a society where complete submission is required.
Instead, consider that the choice as a choice of conscience.