Nullification and the ‘Tyranny’ of COVID Precautions
As of today, California has reinstated a rule requiring people to wear masks indoors, a move aimed at containing a new type of the coronavirus as people gather with family and friends during the holidays.
Following the Thanksgiving Holiday, the state’s per capita rate on new coronavirus cases jumped by 47%, moving from 9.6 cases per 100,000 people per day to 14 cases per 100,000 people per day.
State and local anti vaxx groups are thrilled with the announcement, since they’ve already scheduled protests this week. Lots of ‘brave’ proclamations are appearing on social media and media sympathetic to these groups, decrying the ‘tyranny’ of state ordered mandates.
If you close your eyes while digesting this propaganda, it’s possible to imagine a world where secret police are going door-to-door checking for COVID vaccinations and masks.
I think I can say with some authority that the alternative universes of anti-vaxxers and Trumpanistas have effectively merged. Events organized by both groups are being cross promoted, and the rhetoric borders on full-blown panic.
Tomorrow (December 16) is National Nullification Day, according to the nascent Unity Project, a group seeking to build connections between local anti-vaxx campaigners.
They are seeking to commemorate the Boston Tea Party, “an act of defiance to the tyranny that was being forced on them and to show that Americans would not take tyranny sitting down.”
Having bought into the mythology of the Tea Party, it’s no surprise that the focus of the day’s events (mostly social media posts and flyers) is the radical right’s “nullification” concept.
Nullification, in United States constitutional history, is a legal theory that a state has the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal laws which that state has deemed unconstitutional with respect to the United States Constitution. The theory of nullification has never been legally upheld by federal courts.
The concept of nullification was born out of early 19th century tensions between the northern and southern states. South Carolina’s plan to use militias to block implementation of a tariff was thwarted by a clever compromise.
Nullification arguments were subsumed by states rights and various justifications for racist practices at the local level until about a decade ago.
A 1971 conference organized by the Los Angeles-based Tenth Amendment Center, a group focused on how to weaken the reach of the federal government, gave the theory widespread currency in far right circles.
Extremist Republicans in several states have utilized the concept of state’s rights in drama filled episodes claiming non-cooperation with the federal government. Florida’s Ron DeSantis and Texas’ Greg Abbott are two governors who’ve made defiance of federal immigration policies a keystone of their political personas.
Advocates for the Three Percenter ideology (like Antifa, they are a concept more than an organization), which sees parallels between the U.S. government today and the British government in the 1700s, are to be found throughout anti vaxxer groups. It’s a logical fit, since their main argument is that the U.S. government is tyrannical and actively working to infringe on Americans’ Constitutional rights and liberties.
From the Southern Poverty Law Center:
Three Percenterism is at its core a vanguard extremist movement that claims to be ready to carry out armed resistance to perceived tyranny. Their perceptions of tyranny emanate from the radical conspiracy theories and paranoia rooted in the decades-old antigovernment extremist movement, and have repeatedly led to violence against America’s law enforcement, citizens and residents.
Former La Habra police chief Alan Hostetter, who is open about his allegiance to Three Percenter ideas, hosted the first California rally against COVID-19 stay-at-home orders on April 12, 2020 in San Clemente. (Prior to that time, Hostetter was busy organizing rallies in support of former President Donald Trump leading up to the Jan. 6 insurrection.)
Louis Uridel, owner of oceanside’s of Metroflex Gym, is the face of KUSI’s coverage when it comes to doom and gloom stories about the impact of mandates on small businesses. It’s hard not to notice the Three Percenter tattoo on his hand during interviews.
Local mayors Richard Bailey of Coronado and Bill Wells have joined the chorus of performative politicians who say they “will not comply” with enforcing the state’s mask mandate. The fact that the state isn’t asking them to enforce the mandate (it’s a health department thing) doesn’t seem to get in the way with these aspiring Republican politicians. (Bailey is running against Rep. Scott Peters, Wells had a failed attempt on the 50th CD not long ago.)
The Associated Press has a rather detailed article today focused on the charismatic charlatan known as Robert Kennedy and his ascension from gnat to mosquito as the anti vaxx movement has embraced COVID.
As vaccines have become a wedge political issue, Kennedy’s opposition to the shot has at times brought him close to anti-democracy forces on the right who have made common cause with the anti-vaccine movement. The scion of the country’s most prominent Democratic family has appeared at events that pushed the lie that the 2020 election was stolen and associated with people who have celebrated or downplayed the violent Jan. 6. attack on the U.S. Capitol…
… Anti-vaccine activists are a small but vocal group. According to research conducted by the non-profit Center for Countering Digital Hate, just 12 social media accounts – the “disinformation dozen” – are behind the majority of anti-vaccine posts on Facebook. Studies also show that only about 2% of parents reject all vaccines for their children. A larger group, or about 20% of parents, can more accurately be described as vaccine hesitant, which means they are undecided about having their children receive vaccines as recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention.
https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1471163346191798272?s=20
***
Let’s get to the question of tyranny, a word anti vaxxers use whenever they realize that people don’t take kindly to their Hitler references.
What is a tyrant? And how do Gov. Newsom and Supervisor Nathan Fletcher fit into that mold?
The best-known definition of tyranny comes from Aristotle’s Politics: “Any sole ruler, who is not required to give an account of himself, and who rules over subjects all equal or superior to himself to suit his own interest and not theirs, can only be exercising a tyranny.” Aristotle presents tyranny in a very negative light, as a form of monarchy that has deviated from the ideal, and by listing the characteristics of the tyrant—he comes to power by force, has a bodyguard of foreigners to protect him, and rules over unwilling subjects—Aristotle suggests that a tyrant was always a violent usurper.
Hmmm.
“Not required to give an account of himself:” Both politicians were elected to office with large majorities. Newsom handily defeated a recall movement earlier this year with anti vaxx activists at the heart of it. The movement to recall Fletcher collapsed before it started. And both are up for re-election next year. If elections aren’t an accounting of a leader’s actions, then what is? (You don’t want to spend too much time imagining the anti vaxx answer.)
“To suit his own interest:” Both politicians have enacted policies endorsed by the vast majority of medical professionals. Is Newsom getting rich from COVID? Is Fletcher? Nah…
“He comes to power by force:” Last time I heard both were elected. You know, when people vote. No guns or pitchforks necessary.
“Has a bodyguard of foreigners to protect him:” Given the nearly all-white composition of the anti-vaxx movement, maybe they’re referring to people of color?
“Rules over unwilling subjects:” See “force” above. According to exit polling from the September election,the coronavirus pandemic was the most important issue among California voters.
Bonus Question: “Violent usurper:” See “force” above.
So neither Newsom or Fletcher fits into any of the above definitions. It’s not even close.
Somebody needs to tell these people that having to live by the will of the majority isn’t oppression. And hell hath no fury like a white person slightly inconvenienced.
***
Fast facts
From November 21, 2021 to November 27, 2021, unvaccinated people were 7.1 times more likely to get COVID-19 than fully vaccinated people.
Cases of COVID-19 in California have increased 47% since Thanksgiving, moving from 9.6 cases per 100,000 people per day to 14 cases per 100,000 people per day.
In California, where more than 4,500 new cases are being reported every day
Currently, 64.8% of the state's population is fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
The mandate means everyone, regardless of their vaccination status, is being directed to wear a mask indoors. (Except San Francisco, which has a ridiculously low infraction rate because people played nice with the rules.)
The governor can do mandates because California is still operating under an emergency declaration issued at the beginning of the pandemic. That emergency declaration will remain in place until either Newsom lifts it or the state Legislature votes to end it.
Hey folks! There’s a change coming to Words & Deeds in 2022. I’ll be moving from Wordpress to Substack, which hopefully will mean just a few changes in formatting. Stay tuned for exciting details.
Email me at WritetoDougPorter@Gmail.com