Post-storm fallen tree

I was forced to cancel a lecture last Friday due to Storm Eunice. 

It's not the first time I've known campus to be closed due to inclement weather. I had assumed that, in these post-pandemic days, classes would generally be moved online rather than cancelled. That is what many people did, but unfortunately my personal laptop chose the day before to die. (I think/hope it's a charger issue rather than the laptop itself, but don't have a spare to test it.)

Local damage is not as dramatic as some of the pictures that I've seen online, but there are a few broken/fallen trees around, including this one that blocked my route to the local shops on Saturday:

As I said, not the most dramatic, but this picture might be useful for lecture slides when discussing freedom and obstacles. If someone were to put a barrier across the path, then this would be a restriction on my negative freedom. A fallen tree, however, may leave me unable - but not unfree - to walk down to the shops.

Novax Djokovic

Still on the subject of celebrity role models, but back to vaccination again, tennis star Novak Djokovic has confirmed not only that he is unvaccinated against Covid but also that he would rather miss future tournaments instead of getting jabbed. While he claims not to be anti-vaxx, and to be open to the possibility of vaccination at a later date, it’s unclear what might change his mind at this time.

The Zouma-cat affair

I've blogged recently about footballers as role models. I was talking about vaccination, but this kind of thing has been in the news over the last week or so, since the story broke about West Ham's Kurt Zouma mistreating his cat. In this case, the PFA has acknowledged the responsibility of players for influencing society. 

Despite being fined and condemned by his club, Zouma still played for West Ham against Watford, though he was then absent against Leicester - apparently due to unrelated illness. His brother, Yoan, has however been suspended by Dagenham for his part. (I haven't seen the footage, but I gather Yoan filmed it.)

Controversy around the issue no doubt reflects the widespread (self) perception of Britain as a 'nation of animal lovers' though - as Julian Baggini points out - there's an element of hypocrisy in this, given many people's indifference to animal suffering in other cases.

Still, this serves as another example of the responsibilities of footballers in the public eye.

Ugly freedoms

A colleague recently shared this guest essay from NY Times on the ways in which freedom is appealed to in order to block things such as the teaching of critical race theory. It argues that freedom can be used to exclude and harm minorities, rather than being a right for all. 

It's a shame that this is too late for this year's iteration of PAIR1004, but it's something that might well be useful in future.

Disappointing though that the NY Times refer to the author as 'Ms. Anker' even while describing her as a professor. (I don't know her, but she seems to be an associate professor.)

A striking question

Once again, academics - or, at least, some of those who are UCU members - are voting over strike action. I'm not going to go over the grounds for this, nor the bizarre (but legally mandated) voting system - though I may blog on that another time. Right now, my attention is on the ballot paper:

There's perhaps some ambiguity over what 'prepared' means here. I suppose someone may be prepared to strike over one issue but not another, based on (what they see as) the justice of the cause or chances of success or whatever. 

 

However, one might have no particular desire to go on strike, yet be prepared to do so in solidarity with others (assuming they want to). In that case, one might reasonably answer yes, one is prepared to take action. If everyone were to do that though, then they would all end up engaged in strike action that none of them actually wanted, simply because they were all prepared to do it.

(For the record, the photo is of my ballot paper, but I've already returned it now.)

Merry Christmas

 I gather that 'elf on the shelf' is popular at this time of year, so here are some elves that I made last year:

 

Parts are almost all from Northstar's Frostgrave/Oathmark lines, though I did use a few GW bits including the old Bretonnian shields (featuring stag faces, which I gave a red nose).

One day I hope to use them in an Xmas-themed Frostgrave scenario, though I've not had the chance yet.

Attempts to lower the voting age in Canada

Canada will soon debate a private member's bill, sponsored by NDP MP Taylor Bachrach, proposing to lower the voting age to 16. I don't know its prospects of success, since it seems that there have been similar attempts in the not-so-distant past. Still, this may be useful for discussion on my democratic theory module next semester.

 

In a separate, though related, matter it seems there's a current legal challenge to the current threshold. It's argued that this minimum is an unjustifiable breach of Section 3 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states that "every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly." 

 

I don't know much about Canadian constitutional law, but it's not obvious that lowering the minimum voting age to 16 would be much of an improvement. If every citizen has this right, and citizenship starts from birth, then presumably there should be no minimum voting age. Any age threshold will exclude some citizens who are below that age.

 

Perhaps exclusions of the very young may be justifiable breaches of this right, though this still leaves a question as to at what point this is justifiable. I've heard proposals to set the voting age at various points from 12 to as low as six before. If any of those are remotely plausible, then even 16 would be unjustifiable.

New Zealand to withhold cigarettes

New Zealand is poised to ban anyone born after 2008 from purchasing cigarettes or tobacco. This is an interesting move. It means that those currently able to purchase these products will still be able to do so, but those not yet able to do so will never be able to do so.

 

This could be seen as some form of age discrimination, but it could reflect the view that it's easier to justify withholding freedom from people that do not have it than to justify withdrawing a freedom that people already have - an asymmetry defended by Andi Schmidt.

Kimmich update

I recently mentioned the footballer Joshua Kimmich being a high profile vaccine refuser. (Perhaps I should describe him as merely vaccine hesitant, since his comments suggested that he hadn't ruled out vaccination in future.)

 

I've just seen that he's been ruled out until the new year, following a Covid infection. This isn't actually that far away now, so I hope it's not too serious. Still, perhaps stories like this - rather than stories of refusal - send a better public health message.

Raising the age of marriage (and voting)

I've been teaching on marriage this week, the focus being on same-sex marriage and arguments for abolishing marriage, but I had missed the news that there are moves afoot to raise the minimum age in England and Wales from 16 to 18.

 

It seems this is mainly to prevent children being forced into marriage, which doesn't seem particularly controversial. Nonetheless, even if this doesn't really impact my current teaching, it would be relevant next semester when I look at arguments regarding the voting age. It's often said that if 16 is old enough to get married (etc) then it should be old enough to vote. This argument is undermined though if 16 year-olds are deemed not old enough for other rights.

 

That said, David Runciman's suggestion of lowering the voting age to six has been in the news again lately. I don't know his views on marriage, but I assume he doesn't think that six year-olds should marry, so the two rights certainly don't have to go hand in hand.

Footballers and vaccination

I commented recently about Callum Robinson refusing the vaccine. It seems that he isn't the only footballer to be vaccine hesitant. German international Joshua Kimmich says he isn't vaccinated yet and has concerns about it, though he claims not to be an anti-vaxxer. 

 

If we think that people have a right to refuse vaccination, then that presumably applies to professional sports stars and other celebrities. However, there is a potential issue that high-profile refusers like these will influence others to delay or refuse vaccination, as irrational as it seems for people to follow the lead of footballers rather than health professionals.

 

Perhaps it would be better to keep quiet about these cases or, at least, to increase coverage about those who are vaccinated.

Teaching political theory in a pandemic

This semester, I'm once again teaching our introductory political theory module (PAIR1004). This year, it's a mix of historical and contemporary views but with the overarching theme focusing on freedom. While it's not a module about current events, we thought that we could emphasise the topicality of these discussions, given how freedom keeps coming up in debates over lockdowns.

Here's a brief outline of the module content:

1. Introduction. What is politics? Where do we find it? If politics is about the power to command, then the University itself is a political institution, much like the state. Is there a difference – with respect to freedom and obligation – between the government telling its citizens to wear face masks and the University telling its students to do so?

 

2. Hobbes on the establishment of political society. The state of nature as a lawless free-for-all (like the scramble for toilet roll or petrol). People have no rational incentive to keep contracts, or do anything for the benefit of others, such as wearing face masks, unless we institute an all-powerful sovereign authority to resolve collective action problems.

 

3. Locke on limited government. Locke imagines a more peaceful state of nature – one of liberty, but not licence – in which people mostly respect the rights of others but, since each is judge of his/her own case, disputes may arise – e.g. if I think you should wear a face mask to protect me, but you do not.

 

4. Rousseau on the general will. If facemasks are in the general interest, then the general will may be for everyone to wear a face mask. Those who refuse to comply are ‘forced to be free’.

 

5. Mill on the harm principle. There should be complete freedom of self-regarding action. For instance, society has no right to prohibit activities such as drinking, gambling, or homosexual intercourse, provided that all involved are consenting adults. But society may interfere with conduct that threatens harm to others, such as drink-driving or not wearing a face mask.

 

6. Negative and positive liberty. What are the ends of liberty? What things constrain it? Does a mask mandate reduce liberty? On the negative conception, probably. But, on the other hand, does some people’s refusal to wear masks also reduce the liberty of others? Possibly. If ‘freedom for the pike is death for the minnows’ then how should we adjudicate between competing freedoms?

 

7. Republicanism. The opposite of freedom is not interference, but arbitrary domination. Consequently, law is compatible with freedom, provided it is not arbitrary. For instance, a mask mandate is not arbitrary interference and therefore does not abridge republican liberty.

 

8. Consent theory. According to consent theorists, to consent to membership of a group, such as a state or a University, is to consent to the rules of that group. Thus, if the University’s code of conduct requires the wearing of masks, then members of that University have an obligation to do so in virtue of their consent.

 

9. Other accounts of obligation. Obligations need not be grounded in consent. We have various ‘natural duties’ which include not harming others, for instance by refusing to wear a mask. We may have particularly strong obligations towards those with whom we share community ties, such as members of a family, nation, or university. According to fair play theory, if others make sacrifices for our benefit – for instance, wearing a mask – we may have an obligation to reciprocate.

 

10. Politics in times of emergency. During the recent pandemic, governments have instituted various measures – such as mandatory face coverings, curfews, and lockdowns – that (seem to) abridge our ordinary freedoms. When and why are these measures justified?

 

Our reading list is mostly unchanged, since we can illustrate the application of ideas to the pandemic in class, but an interesting looking collection on political philosophy in a pandemic (Amazon affiliate link) has recently been published. If I were to teach a course like this again, then I might make use of that, but I didn't have time to redesign the course from scratch.

Is vaccination a personal choice?

Like last year, I have a very front-loaded teaching schedule, so posts may be a bit more sporadic between now and Christmas. Still, I'll try to post the odd piece of interest when I get chance. Here is another that I may use in my classes this semester.

West Brom and Republic of Ireland footballer Callum Robinson hasn't been vaccinated. He is reported as saying "I think it's your personal choice and my choice at this moment in time, I haven't been vaccinated".

The Football Association of Ireland concur, saying that they "respect and accept the right of all individuals to make a personal choice on Covid-19 vaccination".

I'm not clear why this 'personal choice' is seemingly accepted here without question. While bodily integrity is at stake, the decision is not what might be called (in Millian terms) 'purely self-regarding' because someone who is not vaccinated may pose a greater risk to other people. This could justify intervention.

Jessica Flanigan makes this point in a 2014 article, where she argues that “Non-vaccination has been mistakenly characterized as a personal, self-regarding medical choice…. people are entitled to make self-regarding medically inadvisable decisions…. But religious and other reasons of conscience cannot justify practices that impose risks on the community”.

 

To be sure, Flanigan doesn't (so far as I'm aware) support forced vaccinations. So, there is indeed a sense in which she thinks people do have a right to refuse vaccination. But this is not a right to refuse vaccination without suffering consequences. She thinks they could (and should) be penalised through fines or certain restrictions on employment.

 

I think I'll be using some, if not all, of these quotations in my lecture slides, possibly in multiple modules.

Down's syndrome and abortion

I'll be covering both abortion and reproductive freedom/selection on my ethics of public policy module this coming semester, so this recent story about Heidi Crowter's High Court challenge is a useful case study.

I'm not a lawyer, but the idea that the law ought to permit abortion in Down's cases, but not others, does seem discriminatory. Of course, one way that could be avoided would be to allow abortion in all cases, rather than in none.

 

The judges not that "not every family would react the same way and the ability to provide for a disabled child would 'vary significantly'" but the same could be said about, for instance, having a girl or indeed having a child at all.

Pixabay

I've not updated for a while as we were away for a bit. I took quite a lot of photos during our travels, so I decided to upload some of them to Pixabay. This is a site that I've used for a while, because pictures can freely be used even for commercial purposes, without attribution, which is ideal for lecture slides. I figured that, having used pictures from this site, I should give something back by uploading some of my own.

 

I'm still figuring things out over there. I'm not a professional photographer, so my pictures aren't as good as many of the others on the site. Still, it may be a handy way for me to organise photos that I may want to use again, even if no one else does. If you're interested, my pictures can be found on my profile here.

Layne Staley Day

 Today marks the second anniversary of Layne Staley Day. (I use this phrasing because it seems the day was a one-off in 2019, rather than an annual thing.) In any case, here's a tribute:

Vaccine incentives

Long-term readers may recall my interest in incentive payments (click the label for more examples). I was interested to see the recent proposals from Australia to pay people (AU $300) to get Covid vaccines.

It's not an original proposal. Similar ideas have been mooted in the US and defended by academics such as Julian Savulescu. Still, while some think that this would be value for money, the Australian government seem sceptical of cash incentives, so we may never know how effective it would prove.