When an "authoritative" figure (corporate execs, doctors, politicians, etc.) uses the term "vaccine hesitant", turn it around and call them "liability hesitant" for not wanting to accept the economic liability for any damages the jewflu mRNA vaxx does to people. They want the liability on you, but they won't accept your choice to not take that liability even though they decided not to be liable themselves. We can't sue the (((vaxx))) makers or the politicians mandating it so they have nothing to lose. Call them liability hesitant and point out their unwillingness to do the right thing for "the greater good".

What you're really saying is that those who didn't get it deliberately, got it as a reaction to the fear from the "news" they believed from the MSM.

My only argument with anything you wrote in this post is that "some" is probably "many".

Pretty clear difference between hesitant and deliberate. Uncertainty breeds hesitance. Certainty breeds deliberate action. So it really comes down to certainty. Certainty comes down to (perceived)knowledge of a subject and trusting your rational faculties.

So: If you're ignorant about the disease and shots, and don't want to take them, that's hesitance.

If you're knowledgeable about the disease and shots, and don't get the shots, that's deliberate.

If you're knowledgeable about the disease and shots, but you're uncertain which is more dangerous to you based on age and comorbidities, and abstain, that's hesitance.

If you're knowledgeable about the disease and shots, and you've determined the shots are more of a danger than the disease, and abstain, that's deliberate.

If you're ignorant about the disease and shots, and you get the shots, you're an idiot.

If you're knowledgeable about the disease and shots, and you get the shots, you're a complete fucking idiot.

If you're a minority, you're probably an idiot.

If you found that last one funny, you might be a redneck.