No Vax, No Tav, Nimby: tutti ugualmente egoisti?

Abstract
In Italy, movements designed to delay, block, or permanently disable large infrastructure projects get often put under the same category as anti-vaxxers, in that both rebel against impositions from above, and happen to be accused of being intolerably selfish. In this paper I show that that they are very differently vulnerable to the accusation of selfishness.
It is contingently true that almost any specific case of opposition to large infrastructure projects is prima facie selfish, but when we take into consideration the arguments used to defend them, selfishness fades away most of the time. When it persist, however, – as in the Nimby case – it turns out to be a morally legitimate kind of selfishness.
On the contrary, not every form of the anti-vax position is prima facie selfish. But the forms that are prima facie selfish are unamendably so; and those that are prima facie not selfish do become immorally selfish, or at least generically immoral, when one tries to concretely argue in favour of them.
I conclude that, contrary to appearances, the moral status of the positions opposing large infrastructure projects, on the one hand, and the anti-vax positions, on the other hand, are relevantly different.