Vaccine IDs are Inevitable
A New King is Trying to take the Throne and He has Rules
One of the newest controversies that we’re all supposed to yell at each other about is vaccine IDs. (Of course, I’m speaking of those vaccines which are designed to treat COVID-19.) I personally don’t think that this recent controversy should come to the surprise of anyone who’s been paying attention for the last couple of centuries. Given the world’s present gods, it is only reasonable to assume that the vaccine IDs—or, for that matter, in any other distinct marker—are a given.
Within this issue, as in many other issues, diversity is threatening. You may not take up a position that is either one of the two: 1) everyone should get the vaccine and the respective ID that comes along with it so that we can know who is safe to be around and who isn’t. 2) no one should get the vaccine (thereby being barred from an ID) because the vaccines are being forced onto us and this is a trampling of our rights.
These two positions are at war. Sure, there may be some who aren’t on distinctly one side or the other, but most of us would like to pick our side and then move on with our lives—this is an understandable position. However, as said above, I would like to show why something akin to the IDs is to be expected. I will not be either arguing for or against them here (I did that elsewhere).
While the sun of modernity sinks lower and lower into the horizon, we are now looking for a new sun. Although it is not clear what king is set to take the throne, there is one very strong candidate: some weaponized and stupefied version of critical theory. This candidate is presenting himself to the people at the moment. Most of us don’t know his history or his parents, but we do know that he is charismatic and appealing—a drink of cool water after our last monarch. At the same time though, it is only a small minority of us who like him; but we who like desperately like him; and we will make our affections known. There is a great deal of diversity in our wanting of a new king. Yet, whether the candidate above described will take the throne or not, every ruler has his rules.
One of the definite rules we must abide by in our lives, in our rules—a meta-rule, if you will—is that you must have rules. Even non-confessional Christian churches have a confession, a set of rules (think of those who call themselves “Bible Believing”). Our new king will have rules. And although this brand of Critical Theory has not been fully coronated yet, (if ever), he surely does act like the king at the moment. He is setting up his rules: who is good and who is bad. But to have good and bad, right and wrong, one must have markers, a distinctive identifier, a measuring stick. And because the three big laws being pushed are Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity, you must either violate these rules as such or use a marker as to who is following these three new transcendentals; this marker, then, becomes the way to create new, lower-order rules. All of a sudden, we can produce the demands for vaccination.
As interesting as this method of legislating may perhaps be, we need to turn our attention to something more to the point. Now that we have the ability, in this new system, to make these little rules, we must now enforce them. For a rule is not really a rule unless followed and enforced (I’m not trying to be a soft mereological nihilist by saying that). When we enforce a rule, we necessarily include some as being followers and others as being non-followers. But how should we decide how to mark these non-followers?
A common complaint, especially by those who lean more to the right politically, is that everything is becoming political. What is meant by this? Historically, everything was, to some great extent, political: there was essentially no distinction. Nonetheless, I think that what these individuals are decrying is the fact that everything is now political in a way that they do not appreciate. Nearly all those on the “right” are to some degree secularist and modernist activists, even if unknowingly. And being of this persuasion, dare I say of this “enlightenment position,” they have made everything “political” as well. In part, it is the redefinition of “political” which upsets them.
In the past, there were many things that were known to be “out” and some things which were known to be “in.” This is true of every society. What is happening now, with our ambitious candidate for king, is that different things are becoming in and different things are becoming out. For example, in modernity you were essentially in the out-group if you thought that “progress” wasn’t to be fundamentally prized; you were in the out-group if you didn’t recognize everyone’s rights in the “democracy;” you were in the out-group if you didn’t think that “science” and “reason” were the best ways of knowing the truth; you were in the out-group if you didn’t stuff “religion” (a category the modernists created) was to be personal and on a different level than every other entity. Frankly, there are many ways that modernity would cast you out—visit Hillsdale college, if you want a taste.
Other cultures have had this too. I have deliberated to not get into these, aside from one example from one king later on. Since this critical theory prince (from now on I will call him “the prince”) is still not fully king, he has not set up all too many distinctions of “in” and “out;” and, at that, most of his distinctions are twists on the last king’s. Now, this is where we come back to the vaccine IDs issue. This prince is wishing to set up a distinction. And if “logic” is one of the hallmarks of character for the last king, then “compassion” is one of the hallmarks for this forthcoming king. Getting the vaccine shows this compassion in an intelligible way: I have gotten the vaccine because I care about those around me and not getting them sick. In addition, one can now have proof of their morality by way of a vaccine ID. “See, here’s the proof that I care.”
Given the background I gave, I hope that it can be seen why this is inevitable. We are moving into a new age with new rules. Every age has rules. One of the rules of this new age is compassion. And a vaccination ID is an easy way to show your compassion.
This is similar to the novel The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne. Anyone remotely familiar with the story knows that the main character, Hester Prynne, has committed adultery and that for her crime she wears a big scarlet letter “A” on her chest. The A says: “This is an adulterer. She is hereby shamed for violating the code of conduct in our world, in our universe, and against our God. She will be known by her deeds.” Many, especially in the modern-day, read this and act appalled. We can’t believe that a community of people, of “religious fundamentalists” (equivalent to “heretic” in modernity), would subject a woman to such life-long punishment for the small crime of unfaithfulness. We act stunned by their “tyrannical rules” on “sexuality.” How could they cast her off? How could they shame her so? It is “unjust!”
Yet, we do the same; we must do the same; we can not help but do the same. If not a large letter “A” on the dress of an adulterous woman, then a ban from Twitter. If not a large letter “A” on the dress of an adulterous woman, then a public shaming for not accepting gay “marriage” as viable. If not a large letter “A” on the dress of an adulterous woman, then a mockery of those on the “Left.” If not a large letter “A” on the dress of an adulterous woman, then the strong cries that everyone who disagrees must be a “racist.” If not a large letter “A” on the dress of an adulterous woman, then an unacceptance of those who are unvaccinated.
We are humans and this is what humans do. We really don’t change much. We don’t walk around saying and doing rational things. We must have the “outs” and the “ins,” for we can not organize even ourselves as individuals without that. If not the adulterous as outcast, then something else must take its place. Modernity had her outcasts, this new age will have her’s. We should not be surprised at mandated vaccines or vaccine ID and passports. We need a filter and a map.
Controversies, including this one, will come and go. But our desires as people, our tendencies, will not. Vaccine IDs, or something like it, are inevitable. We will see if the prince takes the throne or not; but whether it be this prince or another, someone will be enthroned. He will have rules. Do not, therefore, despair; and remember: “we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”