Many libertarians want to like Elon Musk. He just gave them a reason to.
Not because he has decided to stop relying on government to help him sell electric cars. But because he came out against government forcing people to submit to injections.
Musk isn’t old - or sick - and neither are his kids. Therefore, he reasons, there is no reason to inject himself or them with a vaccine against a sickness that doesn’t pose much if any serious risk to themselves - but which is itself much riskier than the virus it might protect them from getting.
Unless it is a novel vaccine, the pending WuFlu vaccine will at best be partially effective - reports have it that the threshold for FDA approval is 50 percent effective - which means 50 percent not effective - and guaranteed to come with a higher risk of serious side effects than the risk of healthy/not-elderly people getting seriously sick from the WuFlu.
Vaccines have a very sketchy record for being safe.
Especially those rushed to market, as the vaccine for the Swine Flu was back in the mid ‘70s. A not-small number of previously healthy people became seriously - and permanently - sick after getting needled.
Journalists - there were such creatures, once upon a time - actually reported this.
Today, they report about the cases! the cases! - because their air-time is bought and paid for by the Needlers, who need to maintain the fear in order to get the mandate.
Which Elon has decided he’ll say no to.
Good for him - and for us.
Needling the healthy and not-elderly is as unnecessary as forcing people who can swim to wear a life-preserver whenever they go near the water. Worse, actually - because the latter would be merely silly while the former (needling the healthy) is objectively dangerous. They are trying to force healthy people to assume a greater risk than the risk of the thing which the needling is supposedly meant to protect them from.
With indemnity!
You know you're in trouble when the government can force you to submit to a medical procedure that you not only can't refuse but which you can't sue for redress in the event you're permanently damaged by it. It is like being told you must buy a car with a potentially lethal defect and if it maims or kills you, you can't sue the company that made it.
Elon also publicly excoriated the “lockdowns” as “fascistic” - which is absolutely correct though perhaps not in the sense he meant it.
Fascism isn’t defined by goose-stepping and Jew-baiting. These are incidentals. Mussolini - who coined the term and based it on the Roman fasces, or lictor’s bundles, which were the symbol of state authority - defined it as the partnering of the state and corporate power.
Does this sound familiar?
The "lockdowns" - ordered by the government - did not lock down corporations. Both were declared essential (by themselves) and given leave to operate, while individual proprietors and small businesses were not. The government, in other words, advantaged the corporations - the "big box" retailers and grocery stores, etc. - and itself at the disadvantage of the not-corporate, with the obvious intent being not public health but the health of corporate/state power. If health were the true reason, the "lockdowns" would have applied generally.
Elon gets this, apparently. At least, partially.
He sees the "de facto house arrest(ing") as "unethical" but does not see the immorality of partnering with the government to enrich himself via mandates that advantage his corporate power. He does not get that if the government can force people to buy electric cars because of assertions about climatological health then surely - logically - it can force people to take a Needle for the sake of assertions about public health.
Elon's heart may be in the right place. But it'd be better if his mind were.
He is, at least, on the right track. Perhaps it will occur to him that it would be much more ethical - and far more moral - to build electric cars that sold on the merits, without resort to mandates.
He's a smart guy - and a very rich guy. He could do it - and by doing it, show the world how it could be done. Offer "ludicrous speed" to those who can afford to pay for the indulgence, as Porsche and Ferrari have always done (without needing subsidies). But offer reasonable cost to those who need it.
If he were to do that, he'd actually be a libertarian - instead of one who believes he is.
. . .
Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics - or anything else? Click on the "ask Eric" link and send 'em in!
If you like what you've found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster - and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
If you'd like an ear tag - custom made! - just ask and it will be delivered.
My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price - free! Click here. If that fails, email me at and I will send you a copy directly!