So "what's the issue" with mandatory masks?

Dutifully and begrudgingly masked up to run necessary errands in Coburg, I regularly encounter fellow Melbournian’s with their masks around their chins chugging on their cigarette as though their life depended on it. And I don’t say this to complain of loopholes in Melbourne’s emergency laws, or to demand tougher penalties for those not properly wearing their masks. If you want to smoke while wearing your mask as an ankle bracelet, I couldn’t give a monkey’s left testicle. I do however highlight this particular type of encounter because it highlights the ludicrous principle underpinning mandatory masks.

We must wear masks, we are told, to protect others. Because masks limit opportunities of unknowingly spreading coronavirus - not catching coronavirus - the principle is that we take responsibility for the health of others. In fact, it is selfish to speak of personal responsibility for one’s own health. And as Victoria’s Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton is fond of repeating, taking responsibility for the health of others is important because something like 40% of the population has comorbidities that increase risk of mortality associated with coronavirus. 

OK, but here’s the rub. It does not matter if I wear 10 masks simultaneously and stay 4 meters away from all other humans, there is no possible way that I can successfully assume responsibility for the health of any other person. I can’t demand that my cousin quit smoking. Nor can I compel the creepy looking guy down the street acquaint himself with a stairmaster instead frequenting the local MacDonalds. And it is these voluntary habits that sees such a large percentage of the population have co-morbidities that place them at higher risk of corona-death.

What I can do however, is take responsibility for my own health such that I minimize the risk of becoming a burden to anyone else and the healthcare system. I can do immune building activities like exercise regularly, eat healthy, take vitamins, or at the risk of a $5000 fine, I could take in the fresh air while I walk along the shore of the closest beach 20-odd kilometers away. 

In sum, I can compel myself to make decisions that mitigate risk should I catch coronavirus, but I cannot compel others to do the same. Thus, the Victorian government mandate that I act in a manner that takes responsibility for the health of others is illogical insofar as it is impossible to achieve. 

So why do they insist on symbolic rules like mandatory masks? A trawl through the comments section of today’s top news item - throngs of unmasked beachgoers enjoying the first glimmer of summer at St Kilda beach - gives us a clue. Melbournian’s fatigued by endless months of lockdown and desperate to return to some semblance of normal life here express extreme anger at so many people flouting Dan’s rules, and the very real prospect that this will condemn them to home imprisonment for many months more. Echoing Dan’s frustration, they label beach-going as selfish, and demand that fines be increased and police respond with greater force.

What these desperate commenters reveal is that though we as individuals are held responsible for the health of our fellow citizens, we are in actuality, powerless to achieve that mandate. We can however be punished for the transgressions of others.

Thus it seems, that the actual policy goal of mandatory masks is not to improve health outcomes in the battle against coronavirus, but rather, to turn neighbor upon neighbor, to divide and conquer public opinion, and to create such a sense of helplessness so as to secure support for ever harsher government interventions into the lives of others on our behalf.