On Vaping and Government Hypocrisy

That most governments are hypocritical is neither a false accusation nor an overstatement, but is a time-tested truth which has been the most prominent characteristic of any form of government in all habitable parts of Earth since Day One. That most people are aware of the hypocrisy of governments and their numerous well-used tricks is neither a wild fantasy nor an exaggeration of the level of enlightenment of the public, but is a humble assumption of the existence of human reason and of a person's ability to discern right and wrong.

The hypocrisy of governments manifests itself in various ways, the most common of which being a conspicuous incongruity between what was said and what's being done. For example, it is almost natural to infer that the North Korean government, self-elected and all-powerful, must have claimed, as any dictatorship would have claimed, that its goal is to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and grant security, prosperity, happiness and freedom to its people. And we all know the other half of the story. For another example, a certain government (to avoid censure, I would omit the name of the certain government I am referring to), prior to the imminent victory in the civil war, not only declared, but also, nailed into the hearts of the people the proclamation that, its goal is to liberate the people and lead them into the paradise of communism, where everyone has what he needs and there would be no hunger, no poverty, and no oppression anymore. Yet in the next 68 years we have witnessed a spectacle of lies, oppression, and bloodshed not to be rivaled or compared with in any other country, except maybe the Soviet Union. There is no need of more examples and descriptions, as governments are, in nature, self-preserving institutes with the weapons of laws, police, and prisons. In this article I am not, however, to expound the diverse forms of government hypocrisy, or, to criticize them and explore possible remedies; rather, here I will zoom in unto the subject of vaping and briefly spell out the act of hypocrisy by the government on this subject.

Let us leave out the tedious laws and regulations that certain governments have enacted and authorized for the restriction of vaping and proceed directly to the discussion of how this act of restriction bespeaks hypocrisy on the part of the government.

Firstly, governments claim that the restriction on vaping is justified on the grounds of public health, which is not an outright lie but does not speak the truth either. Indeed, vaping may cause potential harmful effects, as anything might, but that doesn't warrant it being singled out and most vehemently persecuted, especially when the treatment it received is compared with that of tobacco products the adverse effects on health of which far exceed that of vaping.

Secondly, the discouragement vaping received has in fact, if anyone with half a brain would use it well, to do with big tobacco revenues. Put it in this way. Big Tobaccos make big money and pay big taxes, which the government likes and wishes to stay the same. Things have been going well for one hundred years while everyone has what they want, and then came E-cigarettes, the ultimate threat to tobaccos, the doomsman, the one thing that could ruin all the hard-earned prestige and privileges of tobaccos. What would the Big Tobacco, the vulnerable Rex, the endangered lion and eagle do? Of course it spends money and lobbies; of course some politicians are visited and resources are employed; of course interests are exchanged and pacts are signed. And of course, the victim is E-cigarette-related companies which are considerably less established, politically weak, and which contribute far less financially to interested parties. Governments have, in this case, no doubt, favored the side who offers to put more gold in their coffers, though on academic journals and morning news alike another story is being told.

I think it is permissible that a government restricts or prohibits anything which it deems harmful to the public according to the laws of nature and of reason; it is even acceptable when a government forbids something that may be injurious to its political position or financial interests, as long as it is honest enough to admit and declare so. But when a government does the latter and claims the former, its action establishes dishonesty and cries out Hypocrisy. Like the U.S. government who went for the oil claimed that violations on another country's sovereignty and territorial integrity are just actions of liberation. Like Mr. Winston Churchill who starved 2million souls in Bengal justified his decision on the grounds of policy and his "wishes" for a speedy termination of the war---we all know his opinion of the "primitive Indian people who are in dire need of British rules and British civilization".

In the case of restrictions on vaping carried out by governments, be it FDA regulations in the U.S., or the TPD vaping laws in Europe, or many other bans and prohibitions in other countries, hypocrisy is committed in that the governments put restrictions on vaping for political and financial reasons while claiming their decisions are made on the grounds of public health. The incongruity between what was done and what's being said clearly demonstrates the prominent presence of hypocrisy.

Tags: Vaping, E-cigarettes