One of the first, perhaps the first country to worry about the health effects of smoking was early Twentieth Century Germany. So, for example, the ’science’ of passive smoking first emerged under the Nazis. You can find more, much more, on this in Robert Proctor’s excellent book, The Nazi War on Cancer.

This rather, um, awkward fact is now discussed in a new article in the British Medical Journal. Predictably (the BMJ is a reliable cheerleader for the anti-tobacco crusade), the author finds it “paradoxical” that these notions should have been developed under a totalitarian state. As Jacob Sullum <a href=”

http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2004/12/so_what_if_hitl.shtml#007764

“>points out over at Reason’s blog, there is nothing paradoxical about it:

“In fact, the Nazis’ focus on the threats that risky habits pose to “public health” makes perfect sense in light of their collectivist ideology. “Brother national socialist,” said one bit of Nazi propaganda, “do you know that your Führer is against smoking and thinks that every German is responsible to the whole people for all his deeds and missions, and does not have the right to damage his body with drugs?”

Always kindly, Jacob is a pains to stress that this does not mean that “today’s “public health” paternalists are Nazis.” True enough, although it must be admitted that the motives of these “public health paternalists” are disgusting – and so are their methods. As we’ve discussed here before, if we’re looking for an appropriate label, ‘Health mullahs’ will do. Jacob does, however, go on to say this:

“There is an unmistakable totalitarian logic to the notion that the government has a responsibility to promote “public health” by preventing us from engaging in activities that might lead to disease or injury. The implication is that we all have a duty to the collective to be as healthy as we can be, an idea the Nazis embraced but one that Americans ought to find troubling.”

He’s right. They should.

Look at it another way. When Nurse Bloomberg stops New Yorkers from smoking in bars he is saying, in some sense, that he owns them.

I hope New York is comfortable with that.