The meaning of the word «dialogue»

Freedom ultimately means the right of other people to do things that you do not approve of.
Thomas Sowell

If there is one thing I would strongly recommend to any person trying to understand another person … it is not to think that just because another person thinks differently that this person just does not have all the so-called «facts», or (worse) is evil or stupid.

I was reminded of this «fact» recently when I read that the dialogue with the unvaccinated failed, so — if voluntary measures do not work — we now have to use more … direct measures.

First of all, it is not voluntary if force is used when people do not comply. If that was «voluntary», then you’d «voluntarily» hand over your wallet in a hold-up, because if you do not do so «voluntarily», you get beaten/stabbed/shot or outright killed.

Yeah, I guess we can agree on this one. That’s not voluntary. If people claim they «tried it voluntarily, now they have to coerce you», it means that choice was never an option. Because voluntary means you could have acted differently — and that was never on the table.

Yep, they lied when they talked about voluntary vaccinations.

Second of all, in a dialogue, you get to know the other person’s motivations and reasons. The goal is understanding. You learn, you grow (yeah!). A dialogue is not «once I do this thing, the other person will do what I want him to do». That is not a «dialogue», unless you count the Godfather’s «offer he could not refuse» as dialogue.

And yes, it’s easier to force people. No question about it. But only if you ignore everything else. If you ignore that we are talking (in this case, and that case isn’t even that interesting, it will be much more interesting what is treated this way next) about vaccines that are way to0 old for a quickly mutating RNA virus. If you ignore that once you force people into a certain position, people might just … accept and deal with said situation (e.g., if the state uses — figuratively or literally — force to get me to comply, why shouldn’t I use force to defend myself?).

And to be honest, while I have it easy in a lot of ways, I am nearly at the end of my tether. Due to the amount of available tests for one person at work, I am limited to two days at the university. The rest of the time I have to work at home. And yeah, if I ever hear «do not use your work infrastructure for private purposes» I’m gonna vomit. But even worse, I have to show a negative test each and every day I am at work. It is not enough to do the test, I have to show it to another person to prove that I am not lying. Loyalty and trust cut two way. If I am not trusted, why should I trust you?

And did anyone ever think about what this does to society? Yeah, some people will lie, but to assume that everyone is lying? And that is even beyond what someone nicely put as “Sick until proven healthy is no less tyrannical than guilty until proven innocent.”

This world is more and more becoming a world I do not want to live in anymore.