https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2022/02/15/should-novak-djokovic-vaccinated-yes-should-banned-absolutely/
While certain sections of mainstream media continue to vilify Novak Djokovic with the label “anti-vaxxer,” such a cliched and unthinking dismissal of his stance misunderstands both the nature of the man and the arguments he is making.
The trumped up case made by the Australian immigration minister to justify banning him from competing in Australia and then
deporting him last month alleges Djokovic engaged in efforts to disssuade people from being jabbed but thus is simply untrue. Throughout the whole sorry saga, which has brought shame on the Australian government, the Serbian star has insisted he is not trying to influence anybody, merely exercising his inalienable human right (as defined by the Geneva convention of 1948, to delince a medical procedure he believes to be unnecessary for him. He has also defended the right of people to be vaccinated if they wish.
If fault lies anywhere it is with the Austrialian government, it is their fascistic behaviour in trying to force everybody to get a shot of toxic shite that will not immunise them but is 1000 times more likely than any previous vaccine to kill recipents. (By precedent any medication that is linked to 50 deaths worldwide is withdrawn on safety grounds. To date over 50,000 deaths in UK, USA and Europe have been linked to COVID vaccination.
Novak emphasised this point in a recent BBC interview, the first he has given since his abortive attempt to win a 10th Australian Open title turned into a full-blown Covid-19 culture war. “I was never against vaccination,” he said. “I understand that globally, everyone is trying to put a big effort into handling this virus and into seeing an end to this virus.”
There is a big difference between exercising a personal choice to decline vaccination and questioning the by what right governments and scientists beleive that private citizens should be forcibly compelled, to accept a controversial medication that was rushed through development, by - passed full clinical testing and which was approved only for emergency use after vaccine manufacturers had been civen across the board idemnity from legal action in cases of physical or emotional harm arising from vaccination. Sadly, such are the efforts to caricature Djokovic as the demonic counterpoint to the faultlessly virtuous Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal that politicians, academics and the media have totally failed to recognise the virtues of his personal case for refusing vaccination, leaving him in a position where he can do nothing to dispel the misconceptions crrated by an orchestrated propaganda campaign that he is a self-absorbed menace to public health.
The strength of Novak Djokovic's self belief is beyond doubt, demonstrated b his ability to deny Federer a ninth Wimbledon crown from two championship points down or through his conviction that his superbly conditioned body has no need for the interventions of a vaccine that will neither make him immune to the disease it is marketed as a preventative for, nor stop him spreadig the disease. This is a man who described crying for three days after finally agreeing to surgery on his elbow in 2018, regarding it as an expression of weakness and personal failure.Many of us, like Djokovic, have stood by the principle of If it ain't broke don't fix it, with regard to the much hyped COVID pandemic, facing the opporobium and mass hysteria of the unthinking blob who rushed out to get vaccinated and are now blaming we the unvaxxed for the fact that they have caught COVID and are now experiencing fatigue and a series of minor health problems consistent with a compromised auto - immune system.
****Even so, it was startling to hear him admit that he would give it all up – the pursuit of Nadal’s 21 major titles, the right to be acclaimed as statistically the greatest player of all time – for the sake of his belief that he should be free to refuse a Covid vaccine.
“Why, Novak, why?” asked the BBC’s Amol Rajan, aghast. But in Djokovic’s view, such a liberty overrides any other concern. He has scaled the most improbable peaks in tennis through his obsessive control of every variable in his physical conditioning, even down to the type of water he drinks. He is not about to make any exception now, especially when his paperwork to enter Australia, admittedly much-disputed, suggests that he has already had the virus twice.
But the realities that he is young, low-risk and supremely fit afford him no immunity to the chorus of international condemnation. The received wisdom is that Djokovic, through his apparent prioritising of his own interests over the common good, must be stripped of any right to compete.
One has to wonder in what kind of world do the baying mob of mainstream media journalists and pundits think we live, in which it is deemed appropriate for politicians, journalists and celebrities to give a complete stranger medical advice? ,It may well be the case that the average Australian politician, journalist or celebrity has a literacy level equivalent to something that dropped out of a Wombat's arse, but media contributors in morer advanced nations would do well to research the Hippocratic Oath the Nuremberg Code, the aforementioned Geneva Convention on human rights and perhaps read Milton Friedman's book Capitalism and Freedom to get a sense of what is being fought for here.
****
Simon Briggs
Novak Djokovic’s position on vaccines is as unsurprising as it is eye-rollingly daft.
Here he is, claiming not to be an anti-vaxxer on the grounds that he has never pushed his opinion on others. And yet his interview with the BBC stood at the top of their news website on Tuesday morning, above the build-up to what some anxious observers are terming World War III.
In other words, Djokovic is denying the essential fact that his decisions have an impact on others, whether he likes it or not.
In his world, he is entitled to take control of his own body, without reference to the wider consequences. And yet, through the drama surrounding his ill-fated trip to Australia, he has become one of the highest-profile refuseniks in the world – probably THE highest-profile.
His unparalleled athleticism makes him the ultimate poster child for those who have imbibed conspiracy theories online. He comes across as a clean-running, friction-free biological machine – the key to his status as arguably the greatest male tennis player of all.
As a vaccine sceptic, Djokovic thus represents the human equivalent of the perfect storm, particularly for his many hero-worshippers in the Balkans. Put simply, his actions will make it harder to suppress the virus. So while he has the right to sidestep the vaccine, it is pure sophism to claim that this doesn’t make him an anti-vaxxer.
While the concept of athletes as “role models” has its problems – especially when used as a prurient excuse to trawl through a footballer’s bins – there is a certain responsibility that comes with the sort of fame and fortune that Djokovic has amassed.
Yes, he lives in an ivory tower – or rather several ivory towers, in Monaco, Marbella and Belgrade. But when he goes to a tournament, he will be mixing with other players, as well as fans, media, officials and so on.
And here we return to the essential interconnectedness of things. Each person at that tournament is a little safer because of every dose of the vaccine shared by their peers. Why should they welcome someone who believes they know better, in defiance of all scientific proof.
To put it in more formal terms – and borrow a line written by the influential author Cary Doctorow – “Human beings have an undeniably entwined epidemiological destiny. There are few epidemiological choices that are purely personal - they redound to the people around you.”
from Comments:
No comments:
Post a Comment