To date I have mostly seen it used by believers who feel the need to affirm their belief before going on to question something about the covid shots. "I'm pro-vax BUT..."
The heretics will certainly come up with slurs for out-of-touch Progress believers - some already exist - but I don't think "pro-vax" will catch on.
From within the Progress paradigm, it is "anti-vax" to question the dogma that vaccines are safe and effective sacraments that ought to be given to all humans to ward off the evil of infectious disease.
The truly opposite viewpoint - that vaccines are *all* agents of evil that cause death and disability and have no benefits whatsoever, and that all vaccination should be prohibited by law - has a very small number of supporters, and I don't expect that number to grow by much.
Instead, it seems to me, we have a growing camp of "vax-realists" who see the class of products known as "vaccines" as medical interventions that can have both costs and benefits. There will probably be - at least temporarily - a swinging of the pendulum toward the opposite end, what might be called "vax-doubters". The vax-doubter position is an acknowledgement that vaccination can be useful *in theory* - and probably a willingness to get a rabies shot if bitten by a rabid dog - but a refusal to accept any more standard vaccines for self or family after being burned by the covid vaccine debacle and seeing the deep-rooted corruption and fraud within the vax-pharma-regulatory agency bureaucracy.
After another few generations - if the technology to produce vaccines still exists and the religion of Progress implodes - I would expect this to settle into an equilibrium in which vaccines are still in use on a purely voluntary basis, but only a small number of shots for which solid evidence of benefit exists. At that point I predict that people will look back on the "vax wars" as one of those strange episodes in human history where humans got themselves all in a tizzy over some distinction or other.
I expect that - as evidence of vaccine harm mounts - there will be a growing movement to blame all manner of deaths and diseases on vaccines without proof of a link. Hearthspirit has been making that argument here, and has suggested that Real Not Rare and other compilations of vax injury stories feed into it in a harmful way.
I actually see that phenomenon as distinct from the pro-vax/anti-vax debate and the sacramental status of vaccines, driven by a different by equally deep aspect of the human psyche. Most of us don't want to die or get sick, and so there is a strong tendency to find reasons to believe why suffering happens to *other* people (but couldn't happen to us). "He got cancer because he wallowed in harmful thoughts." "She got raped because of what she was wearing." "My uncle had a stroke because he was vaccinated." If we can assign cause to some distinction between ourselves and the person who is suffering, then we can feel more secure (while also blaming the victim for their own suffering).
It is important to avoid falling into that trap, but I also think it is important to acknowledge the reality of vaccine injury.
"Dance to participate" - yes! Although when confronting predators and pathogens, there is a certain amount of infantry required as part of the dance. There is a balance to be struck between "let viruses spread freely with no interventions" and "kill, lockdown, and quarantine to control".
Thanks also for putting words to my discomfort with the human hunting community. Those who participate - including some very serious hunters in my family - like to frame it in terms of bringing home food and being a part of nature. But too often the goal seems to be to establish human dominance over powerful creatures and to feed the ego by bringing home trophies. If you would drive 200 miles and sit in a tree for three days to shoot a giant buck but you wouldn't shoot the doe in your backyard, then it's not about food or participating the web of life...
Re: Vaccines as a class
To date I have mostly seen it used by believers who feel the need to affirm their belief before going on to question something about the covid shots. "I'm pro-vax BUT..."
The heretics will certainly come up with slurs for out-of-touch Progress believers - some already exist - but I don't think "pro-vax" will catch on.
From within the Progress paradigm, it is "anti-vax" to question the dogma that vaccines are safe and effective sacraments that ought to be given to all humans to ward off the evil of infectious disease.
The truly opposite viewpoint - that vaccines are *all* agents of evil that cause death and disability and have no benefits whatsoever, and that all vaccination should be prohibited by law - has a very small number of supporters, and I don't expect that number to grow by much.
Instead, it seems to me, we have a growing camp of "vax-realists" who see the class of products known as "vaccines" as medical interventions that can have both costs and benefits. There will probably be - at least temporarily - a swinging of the pendulum toward the opposite end, what might be called "vax-doubters". The vax-doubter position is an acknowledgement that vaccination can be useful *in theory* - and probably a willingness to get a rabies shot if bitten by a rabid dog - but a refusal to accept any more standard vaccines for self or family after being burned by the covid vaccine debacle and seeing the deep-rooted corruption and fraud within the vax-pharma-regulatory agency bureaucracy.
After another few generations - if the technology to produce vaccines still exists and the religion of Progress implodes - I would expect this to settle into an equilibrium in which vaccines are still in use on a purely voluntary basis, but only a small number of shots for which solid evidence of benefit exists. At that point I predict that people will look back on the "vax wars" as one of those strange episodes in human history where humans got themselves all in a tizzy over some distinction or other.
I expect that - as evidence of vaccine harm mounts - there will be a growing movement to blame all manner of deaths and diseases on vaccines without proof of a link. Hearthspirit has been making that argument here, and has suggested that Real Not Rare and other compilations of vax injury stories feed into it in a harmful way.
I actually see that phenomenon as distinct from the pro-vax/anti-vax debate and the sacramental status of vaccines, driven by a different by equally deep aspect of the human psyche. Most of us don't want to die or get sick, and so there is a strong tendency to find reasons to believe why suffering happens to *other* people (but couldn't happen to us). "He got cancer because he wallowed in harmful thoughts." "She got raped because of what she was wearing." "My uncle had a stroke because he was vaccinated." If we can assign cause to some distinction between ourselves and the person who is suffering, then we can feel more secure (while also blaming the victim for their own suffering).
It is important to avoid falling into that trap, but I also think it is important to acknowledge the reality of vaccine injury.
"Dance to participate" - yes! Although when confronting predators and pathogens, there is a certain amount of infantry required as part of the dance. There is a balance to be struck between "let viruses spread freely with no interventions" and "kill, lockdown, and quarantine to control".
Thanks also for putting words to my discomfort with the human hunting community. Those who participate - including some very serious hunters in my family - like to frame it in terms of bringing home food and being a part of nature. But too often the goal seems to be to establish human dominance over powerful creatures and to feed the ego by bringing home trophies. If you would drive 200 miles and sit in a tree for three days to shoot a giant buck but you wouldn't shoot the doe in your backyard, then it's not about food or participating the web of life...