Understanding Anti-Vaxxer Motivations

​A recent poll revealed that there are roughly 45 million American registered voters who have not received even a single dose of a Covid-19 vaccine.  Excluded from this number are millions of other adult Americans who have not registered to vote as well as the 48 million American children under the age of 12 for whom no vaccine has been approved. Of those 45 million unvaccinated adults,  83% (or roughly 37 million) have said that they have no intention of becoming vaccinated. What is even more shocking than the actual number of professed anti-vaxxers is that a very large percentage of them have asserted that they would not change their minds even if the vaccines were shown to have no adverse side effects or if their employers required them to become vaccinated. These are astounding statistics considering that the U.S. death toll from Covid-19 now stands at over 700,000 and is currently projected to reach 783,000 by the end of this year. That’s more Americans soldiers than have been killed in any war, including the Civil War in which there were 750,000 combat deaths.

  When confronted with seemingly irrational behavior, it’s important to explore the underlying causes as it could reveal potentially dangerous motivating factors that the seemingly irrational responses were intended to obscure. To be sure, a significant percentage of the unvaccinated have expressed concerns over the side effects of vaccines. Such concerns, however, seem hollow considering that the current vaccines have already been administered to several hundred million individuals with scarcely any adverse reactions. Equally importantly, those vaccines are have proven highly successful in preventing death or prolonged hospitalizations associated with Covid-19. Also, considering the particularly virulent nature of the Delta variant (which is reported to be twice as lethal as earlier strains of the virus), concerns about remotely possible adverse reactions would seem to pale in comparison to the potential adverse consequences of a Covid-19 infection, over 1% of which are currently ending in the patient’s death.

 Some of the unvaccinated, having heard reports of “breakthrough” infections, harbor fears that the current vaccines may not be effective. This too seems more of an excuse than a reason for not wanting to become vaccinated. Even those previously vaccinated who contract Covid-19 rarely need to be hospitalized and virtually none of them are among the over 2,000 Americans who are currently dying from their Covid infections on a daily basis. Others resisting becoming vaccinated have expressed a fear that they are simply being used as human guinea pigs in an effort to establish the efficacy of vaccines that were rushed to completion. This excuse is also dubious as the Pfizer vaccine was given final approval last month. These implausible concerns seem to be an expression of a more generalized distrust in our federal government. 

 Indeed, along this same spectrum are those who have expressed fear that the current vaccine program is in fact a clandestine scheme designed to control their future behavior.  QAnon adherents are reported to view the current vaccines as “bioweapons” concocted by an evil cabal of corrupt government officials and drug companies. While it’s not difficult to envision corrupt public officials having cast their lot with the pharmaceutical industry, it’s still a stretch to think that such an unholy alliance might have goals beyond simply assuring the re-elections of the politicians and enhancing the profits of their pharmaceutical co-conspirators.

 ​ Much of the anti-vaxxers’ behavior can be traced to a widespread disinformation campaign being conducted by the Russian government in an effort to undermine confidence in the U.S. government in general and its vaccine program in particular. This campaign has been disseminated through right-wing radio and television programs and social media sites. Social media is a particularly effective medium for disinformation because the algorithms used by such sites are designed to refer their readers and viewers to other sites offering the same messages. This has a highly reinforcing effect which tends to enhance the credibility of the original misleading information. 

  While virtually all of the reasons voiced by anti-vaxxers can be traced to this disinformation campaign, most Americans are able to dismiss such messages as being implausible. That’s largely because most American receive their information from multiple sources and are thus usually able to discern between true and false information. However, those who limit the sources of their information clearly become more susceptible to such disinformation. This factor can be seen in the significant differential in the political leanings of Republicans and Democrats. Recent polling reveals that roughly 20% of registered Democratic voters have refused to become vaccinated as compared to 40% of registered Republican voters.

 ​Just because someone is exposed to disinformation doesn’t assure that he or she will believe it. There is another factor that must be present—they have to want to believe it. That factor can been seen in those who have embraced Trump’s “Big Lie”; i.e., that Trump actually won the 2020 election and that Biden’s apparent election was achieved by nefarious means. A recent poll revealed that currently 77% of registered Republicans purport to believe the  “Big Lie.” What makes this astoundingly high figure even more remarkable is that it has increased from roughly 70% over the past five months in the face of a stream of new confirmations that the “Big Lie” has no basis in fact. During this period at least three judges, who had previously rejected lawsuits to overturn the results of the 2020 election, have gone on to sanction the Trump Campaign’s attorneys who brought those actions. That includes Rudy Giuliani, whose licenses to practice law in New York and in Washington, D.C. have now been suspended, and nine other attorneys who helped propagate the “Big Lie.” In addition, the five-month “audit” by the Cyber Ninjas of voting in Maricopa County has revealed that Trump lost the election in that county by a larger margin than previously reported. This is consistent with the post-election audits conducted in the States of Michigan and Wisconsin which found no significant change in the voting results in their states. 

  There also seems to be another connection between (a) those who would jeopardize their personal health by defying the federal government’s entreaties to become vaccinated and (b) those who would proclaim support for the Big Lie in the face of overwhelming and continuing mounting evidence that President Biden was the true winner of the 2020 election. Both involve the voting base of the Republican Party and, additionally, both appear to be attacks against the Biden administration.

  One possible explanation for why anti-vaxxers have subordinated concerns for their personal health is to demonstrate their loyalty toward Donald Trump.  Certainly sacrificing one’s own well-being conveys a strong message of support. It could be analogized to a soldier volunteering to take part in a dangerous mission. While that theory has a ring of realism, it seems inconsistent with what took place at a recent Trump rally in Alabama.  During that rally Trump revealed that he had been vaccinated and encouraged those in his audience to do likewise. When his adoring supporters booed that suggestion, Trump quickly retreated and said that he understood that they wanted to assert their “personal freedom,” drawing applause from his audience. Thus, it would appear that the motivations of the anti-vaxxer movement go beyond their support of Trump.

​ This has led some to believe that anti-vaxxers are trying to do everything in their power to make the Biden presidency a failure so as to return control of the federal government to the Republican Party.  This would include undermining the Biden administration’s efforts to bring the coronavirus under control. While this may place their health in danger, as well as that of their friends and relatives, in their minds this seems to be a cause that merits such a sacrifice.  This type of action could be considered a complement to the tactics utilized by Republican members of Congress over the past thirty years to block the legislative agendas of Democratic administrations. That tactic is currently on display in the U.S. Senate where Republicans are opposing Democratic efforts to raise the debt ceiling and to enact the Build Back Better and voting rights legislation.  See “Partisan Politics” which traces this practice back to the Clinton administration.

​ A recent demonstration of the power of anti-vax sentiment was provided by Army Lt. Colonel Paul Douglas Hague who informed Fox News’ Sean Hannity that he had resigned from the U.S. Army over its recent requirement that all military personnel receive the Covid vaccine.  Colonel Hague was leaving the army after 18 years of service, two years before he would have become entitled to receive a life-time military pension. In doing so, he did not express any reservations about the efficacy or safety of the vaccines. Rather, he simply stated that he considered the Army’s mandate to be an infringement on his “personal freedom.” He admitted, however, that he had followed orders in previous years to take a wide variety of vaccines including eight shots for anthrax and smallpox vaccinations among many others. It’s difficult to understand how a man who had spent his prior 18 years following the orders of his superior officers, knowing that he could be asked to place his life place his life in danger, would balk at an order unquestionably designed to protect both him and his fellow service members.

 ​It’s easy to dismiss Colonel Hague’s story as mere anecdotal evidence as he could have been passed over for his next promotion and thus required to resign. Still, it’s nevertheless consistent with the polling data showing large numbers of anti-vaxxers expressing their intention to leave their jobs if their employers required them to become vaccinated. In addition, there are reports that dozens of members of the Massachusetts State Police have resigned their positions over a vaccine mandate. Similarly, even a smattering of healthcare workers around the country have resigned their positions over vaccine mandates, leaving already short-handed hospitals with even fewer workers. What makes this particularly surprising is that at the same time a large numbers of healthcare workers have expressed their resentment toward unvaccinated Covid patients who, having disregarded entreaties to become vaccinated, have sought refuge in their hospitals.

 Of course, resistance to governmental authority did not begin with Trump supporters --  it dates back to the beginning of recorded history. Groups throughout the ages have demonstrated, rebelled, fled or thrown off the shackles of authoritarian rule. While democratic government was devised as an antidote to autocracy, it has hardly been immune to protests and various forms of civil disobedience. Minorities in democratic societies have long staged protests when they have felt that their rights were being diminished or abrogated. In many cases, civil rights protesters, like the late John Lewis, have had to endure hardships and even death to protect their civil liberties. 

 Still, it’s hard to pin-point what explains the motivation for anti-vaxxers to believe the disinformation to which they have been exposed. These individuals are not protesting over government action adversely affecting their health, safety or even their economic well-being. They appear to be protesting over government control intended for their own betterment and protection. Equally puzzling are the repeated references to “personal freedom.” No one is threatening to lock them up or even restrain the way they conduct their lives. In every society personal freedoms are limited in countless ways to make communal living more civil and productive. This leads to the conclusion that their “personal freedom” rationale is intended to obscure, rather than explain, their true motivation.

 It’s also instructive to note that these same advocates of “personal freedom” applauded the Trump administration’s unapologetic cruel treatment of asylum seekers at our southern border. Thus, while they proclaim that mask and vaccine mandates are attacks on their “personal freedom”, they apparently find nothing wrong with confining asylum-seekers in over-crowded facilities and separating children from their parents. Similarly, these same individuals have remained silent as Republican controlled states have been passing a multitude of laws designed to limit voting by minorities. Such actions are wholly antithetical to a democratic society; yet they have not evoked a word of criticism from these rabid advocates of “personal freedom” who have disrupted town meetings and threatened school board members who have voted in favor of mask mandates. 

 In a recent New York Times article about Covid treatments in the State of Tennessee, Margaret Renkl, who covers politics and culture in the South, reported that throughout the South there are many people who “hate” the federal government. In large measure this is a lingering outgrowth from the Reconstruction era when the federal government upturned Southern society by elevating the status of former slaves. More recently, that latent hatred, which was first resurrected during FDR’s presidency, has been rekindled by the efforts of the Biden administration to enhance the social safety net for the nation’s poor and to secure the right of all Americans to vote.  Now the problem has taken on an added dimension as whites living in those states no longer represent a majority of their states’ potentially eligible voters. Since those living in our southern states represent a significant percentage of the nation’s anti-vaxxers (as evidenced by state-wide vaccination rates below 50%), there appears to be a correlation between anti-vaxxers and those who harbor antagonism toward the Biden administration.

 To ascertain what’s actually influencing their behavior it’s helpful to examine the messages they are receiving from Republican politicians, Fox News and right-wing media. One possible factor is that they are being influenced by references to “Replacement Theory,” a concept frequently mentioned by Republican elected officials and right-wing talk show hosts.  This concept posits that Democrats are seeking to open the nation’s borders to black and brown people who will enable their Party to continue to control of the federal government, placing white voters forever in the minority.  This message, along with complaints about “Critical Race Theory” (see, Racism in America”) resonates with many white Americans who fear losing their position of dominance over minority groups.  

 In many respects “Replacement Theory” is simply a continuation of the ideas encoded in “Make America Great Again.” As discussed in America’s Descent from Greatness, this campaign slogan was never about restoring the American economy or even the nation’s military, both of which continue to dwarf those of all other nations. It was simply a “dog whistle” directed to economically and socially distraught white Americans promising to return the country to the days when “Equal Justice under Law” was only intended to refer to people with white skin.

 The sad truth is that “Replacement Theory” is a wholly made-up crisis, completely lacking in substance and simply designed to politically mobilize a disaffected segment of the population. While it’s true that the demographics of our nation are changing and that the percentage of white Americans is steadily declining, current projections are that white Americans will not be outnumbered for another 25 years. More importantly, there is no reason to believe that they will suffer the loss of privilege when that happens.  There are already numerous counties, cities and towns in which the reins of government are controlled by minorities and there is no evidence that whites living in those jurisdictions are any worse off. In short, fears of becoming second-class citizens seems to be more of a projection of their own feelings toward minorities.

It is, of course, by no means certain that those anti-vaxxers who explain their actions as assertions of their “personal freedom” are actually motivated by a fear that Democrats are out to diminish their political standing through efforts to broaden the base of our democracy. Still, this appears to be the explanation that is most consistent with the apparent facts. Thus, the best remedy for addressing this form of anti-governmental outrage is to continue to widen the use of vaccine mandates and continue to work toward the enactment of federal voting rights legislation.