Skip to content

Where Is the Choice?

I am not going to humiliate myself by trying to explain to them that poisoning me is not good for me. I want a way to explain to them that poisoning me will not be good for them.

Photo by Christopher Campbell / Unsplash

Tani Newton

It’s a funny thing I’ve noticed about people: they habitually talk about something that is not the real issue and you have to listen to them for a long time to find out what’s really eating them.  

The even funnier thing is that I do it myself, even though it drives me crazy when other people do it. Somehow, when it comes time to say what you think about something a bit controversial, the real issue always seems to be the most awkward and embarrassing thing to talk about. And so we construct a narrative, or we cite statistics, or we bring up side issues, and discuss them in elaborate detail. 

Take fluoride, for example. The debate always rages around whether or not fluoride is good for your teeth. But that’s not the issue. Why do we not have such highly charged public debates about whether or not other things are good for you? Fluoride is an issue because governments cause it to be put into public water supplies. 

If they didn’t do that then you could go and buy yourself some fluoride tablets if you wanted to take fluoride. Or you could use the relevant toothpaste. Or the government could make fluoride tablets available free for anyone who wanted them. The issue isn’t whether or not it’s good for you. The issue is whether or not public authorities can rightly medicate people without their consent. That would be the same whether it was good for you or not. 

And the issue would be the same whether it was the government or the majority making the decision. If there was a vote on the matter, would it be right for the majority to force the minority to be medicated without their consent?  

There is a place for the facts. As with a lot of other things, it’s good to point out the truth so that people will realise they’re being lied to. But no amount of facts or statistics, by itself, will ever give you an answer of moral right or wrong. Nor, I think, will it ever convince bad people not to do bad things.  

I don’t know why our elected and unelected officials want to poison me. But I know that I am not going to humiliate myself by trying to explain to them that poisoning me is not good for me. I want a way to explain to them that poisoning me will not be good for them.

Latest

Quick Hit

Quick Hit: Own It, Both Of You

National pledges a digital trans-Tasman trial before the 2028 T20 World Cup. Hipkins says he and Albanese agreed it in 2023. Luxon says you need National to get things done. The row is about credit, not caution. Own it, both of you.

Members Public
Cartoon: Chris Hipkins brands Split Your Vote an absolute rort on one side while leaving a Te Pati Maori pathway open on the other

Hipkins the Hypocrite

Hipkins called Harry Mowbray’s split-vote campaign an absolute rort by wealthy entrenched interests. Under MMP an overhang is a feature, not a loophole. Chippy only hates it when his mates aren’t running it. If it is absolute fraud, rule Te Pāti Māori out. He will not.

Members Public