• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Myth of the Social Contract

theplaydrive said:
That an the fact that it requires people to "evolve" taking away all responsibility from libertarians to convince others that their philosophy is worth embracing.
Click to expand...

The Duggar family is "evolving" faster than the Libertarian Party :snicker:
 
sangha said:
The Duggar family is "evolving" faster than the Libertarian Party :snicker:
Click to expand...

You are precisely why I understand Libertarians, even If I don't agree with them. When partisan people like you dominate the political medium, its very appealing to want to move towards something better. Actual political philosophy is much more comforting than watching the sneetches play out in real life.
 
Last edited:
rathi said:
sangha said:
The Duggar family is "evolving" faster than the Libertarian Party :snicker:
Click to expand...

You are precisely why I understand Libertarians, even If I don't agree with them. When partisan people like you dominate the political medium, its very appealing to want to move towards something better. Actual political philosophy is much more comforting than watching the sneetches play out in real life.
Click to expand...

I understand rightwing libertarianism just fine. And politics is not for the weak. Find your comfort wherever you please. It's still a free country
 
rathi said:
So you individualist philosophy will only work if everyone goes along with it?That is pretty much exactly why Libertarianism doesn't work.
Click to expand...

That isn't what I said.
Libertarianism isn't a total individualist philosophy, contrary to popular belief.

It is actually a balanced position between individual and community, based on circumstance.
Something these people will never understand and don't particularly care to.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
That isn't what I said.
Libertarianism isn't a total individualist philosophy, contrary to popular belief.

It is actually a balanced position between individual and community, based on circumstance.
Something these people will never understand and don't particularly care to.
Click to expand...

is that balance between individual and community this thing we call a social contract?
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
That isn't what I said.
Libertarianism isn't a total individualist philosophy, contrary to popular belief.

It is actually a balanced position between individual and community, based on circumstance.
Something these people will never understand and don't particularly care to.
Click to expand...
If all libertarians think of their philosophy like this - as something that only the enlightened few can understand - then the failure of libertarianism to become popular and accepted is of no fault but their own.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
No.
Unless you mean a social contract made upon voluntary agreement of consenting adults, not under duress.
Click to expand...

There really isn't a choice. What should we do with minors born in the U.S. before they become legal adults? What should we do with people who reject the contract?

You can break the social contract by leaving the country or re-negotiate by having a revolution. Obviously those aren't exactly nice choices, but that is the nature of many contracts.
 
rathi said:
There really isn't a choice. What should we do with minors born in the U.S. before they become legal adults? What should we do with people who reject the contract?

You can break the social contract by leaving the country or re-negotiate by having a revolution. Obviously those aren't exactly nice choices, but that is the nature of many contracts.
Click to expand...

That's the whole point of having limited social contracts.
They are concise and the super majority tends to agree.
 
theplaydrive said:
If all libertarians think of their philosophy like this - as something that only the enlightened few can understand - then the failure of libertarianism to become popular and accepted is of no fault but their own.
Click to expand...

I can't help that people want simplistic, "silver bullet" answers to a complex world.
I do not claim to patronize stupidity and ignorance.

People not realizing that quick political answers are not typically right, is not the fault of my ideology.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I can't help that people want simplistic, "silver bullet" answers to a complex world.
I do not claim to patronize stupidity and ignorance.

People not realizing that quick political answers are not typically right, is not the fault of my ideology.
Click to expand...
It's not the fault of your ideology - it's your fault and the fault of anyone who thinks like you. To say that your ideology is for the "evolved" - which you think most of humanity will never be is simply a means of projecting one's own unwillingness or inability to act rather than preach onto others. It's the difference between saying, "If they don't agree with me, they're stupid" and "If they don't agree with me, I'll convince them."
 
theplaydrive said:
It's not the fault of your ideology - it's your fault and the fault of anyone who thinks like you. To say that your ideology is for the "evolved" - which you think most of humanity will never be is simply a means of projecting one's own unwillingness or inability to act rather than preach onto others. It's the difference between saying, "If they don't agree with me, they're stupid" and "If they don't agree with me, I'll convince them."
Click to expand...

Actually that comment was a bit of sarcasm, as a response to those who like to criticize me and those like me because we currently have no reasonable means of practicing our beliefs.

Edit:

I have clearly edified my position umpteenth times before.
I do not believe in wide catch all social safety net for people and corporations, because negative consequences to actions is part of the learning process and evolution of humanity.
 
Last edited:
Harry Guerrilla said:
That's the whole point of having limited social contracts.
They are concise and the super majority tends to agree.
Click to expand...

So what is your idea of the limited social contract then? How exactly does it work.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Basically covers the restrictions on fraud and force.
Click to expand...

I get that your social contract would have strike a different balance with fewer benefits in return for fewer restrictions. How do you ensure your requirement that contract be only between consenting adults not under duress?
Again, what happens to children and people who want to opt out?
 
rathi said:
I get that your social contract would have strike a different balance with fewer benefits in return for fewer restrictions. How do you ensure your requirement that contract be only between consenting adults not under duress?
Again, what happens to children and people who want to opt out?
Click to expand...

Well it's predicated on the belief that fraud and force are widely held as wrong.
It one wanted to extend a social contract to more people, then they would be able to join states and localities that have enhanced social contracts.

Children are the responsibility of adults.
They would essentially be the same as they are now.
 
Neomalthusian said:
A "social contract" is a clever and sleazy way to entitle people to others' property despite there being no offer, no acceptance, and no consideration regarding that exchange. Liberals love language like "social contract" because it provides a legal (and altruistic sounding) way to violate property rights.
Click to expand...

nah... i could far more easily take your rights AND your **** and your life too, for that matter, with a short length of of pipe... i don't need to go to school and study social science and philosophy to do that.

i fact, you would have no **** without the SC. you would be just another punk peasant working for the guys that owned everything... your right to private property is a direct result of the formation of tat profound philosophy.

overexaggerated [sic]
Click to expand...
indeed

geo.
 
Last edited:
rathi said:
I get that your social contract would have strike a different balance with fewer benefits in return for fewer restrictions. How do you ensure your requirement that contract be only between consenting adults not under duress?
Again, what happens to children and people who want to opt out?
Click to expand...

Let people who want to opt out ope out. They shouldn't not be forced to deal with something that they don't want to.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
That isn't what I said.
Libertarianism isn't a total individualist philosophy, contrary to popular belief.

It is actually a balanced position between individual and community, based on circumstance.
Something these people will never understand and don't particularly care to.
Click to expand...

It is just the opposite. It is a 'philosophy' built around the self. It is an 'ideology' built around the individual. it is a belief system built around the elevation of the individual above society ad their fellow citizens. It is a belief system which uses a scale which weighs those elements and almost always comes down on the side of the one versus the many.
 
haymarket said:
It is just the opposite. It is a 'philosophy' built around the self. It is an 'ideology' built around the individual. it is a belief system built around the elevation of the individual above society ad their fellow citizens. It is a belief system which uses a scale which weighs those elements and almost always comes down on the side of the one versus the many.
Click to expand...

It's not an ideology. It's an emotional reaction to a complex and modern society that helps the libertarian feel like a "rugged individualist" who would be better off if all those other people would just stop holding them back.
 
rathi said:
So you individualist philosophy will only work if everyone goes along with it?That is pretty much exactly why Libertarianism doesn't work.
Click to expand...

what dooms libertarianism is a combination of so many people have become addicted to government handouts and that such people can outvote those who want freedom.

the philosophy itself is fine as long as the parasites don't have too much say

communism on the other hand will never work because it is contrary to the most inherent fabric of human nature
 
from Sangha


It's not an ideology. It's an emotional reaction to a complex and modern society that helps the libertarian feel like a "rugged individualist" who would be better off if all those other people would just stop holding them back.
Click to expand...

It is probably more of a pseudo ideology that has trappings of political thought but ultimately fails. You cite the icon of the "rugged individualist" and that sort of thing certainly played a role in a young developing nation like the early USA and the expansion westward. That sort of person is increasingly out of step in the modern world.

Looking back, I remember when I took a course in Japanese many years ago and I was struck by their word for we call "I" - 'watashi' is much longer. As such, it is not intended to be used that often or begin every other sentence like we do here. Their word for the group or society is considered as much more important and their society reflects that basic vocabulary difference. In our culture, the I is much more important than the WE to some.


What has doomed libertarianism is that its essence it is anti-society and based on the ideal of personal selfishness above the rest of society. It is basically mostly I, I, I, I .Man is a social creature who needs to live with others in a social situation. A nation of 300+ million people cannot live where we have 300 million people as their own islands entire unto themselves. At its root, libertarianism weighs the interests of society versus the interests of the individual and almost every time weights the judgment in favor of the self interests of the individual over that of the entire and larger society.

We know that pure communism does not work. That is nothing new. What one of the problems of the age we live in that must be solved is to balance out the extremes of extreme ideologies such s libertarianism and communism to find something in the middle which works both for the larger society and for individuals who comprise it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom