No, wearing a face mask isn’t a threat to your freedom
(Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
Since the government’s announcement that facemasks will soon become compulsory in all shops and supermarkets there has been an astounding level of backlash. The two main schools of thought seem to stem from either a) it’s anti-libertarian to impose controls like this or b) it’s harder to communicate with a mask on. The former is fundamentally incorrect and the latter is wilfully naïve.
Indeed, fellow contributor to this site Sean Walsh has managed to produce a beautifully well-written article on the value of face to face interaction and human understanding. I don’t refute the sentiment of it at all, but to pretend this pandemic is nothing to fear and the freedom to make facial expressions matters more than people’s lives is wrong.
Yes, Covid-19 has caused a major state intervention into the daily lives of everyone in the UK, and yes, I understand why people don’t like this. There are many, me included, who fundamentally dislike the idea of being told what we can and cannot do by the state. It’s not unreasonable to believe that we should be able to exercise individual freedoms, but sometimes circumstances have to overtake dogma.
The contention that some people don’t feel the need to protect themselves inside a shop, supermarket or train is not a libertarian argument — it’s a selfish one.
The purpose of a mask is not just to protect yourself, but to ensure that the chances of everyone in an enclosed space getting infected is reduced. For those who are still convinced that this is a government assault on individual liberty, try comparing your liberties to those of everyone else.
While wearing a mask, you are completely capable of doing basic daily tasks, such as going inside a shop, getting on a train and generally getting on with your daily life. Now let’s say that you have any of the conditions that make you significantly more vulnerable to Covid. The risk of walking into shops with people coughing, sneezing and generally breathing all over each other suddenly becomes a daily gamble with your health. By that “libertarian” refusal to adhere to basic government guidelines the opportunities for so many others are significantly curtailed. A decision by the minority who see no direct threat to themselves, exposes the vulnerable to whatever people breathe on them. They then face the question of whether to even go outside their home. This doesn’t even cover those working in the shops who often can’t afford not to work, no matter the risks.
The idea that wearing a scrap of cloth across the lower-half of the face that allows for a full range of speech and movement, doesn’t prohibit anyone from doing anything or going anywhere, is a threat to their civil liberties is laughable. The idea that the fit and healthy are willing to endanger others on the tenuous grounds of libertarianism is deadly serious.
