Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If he isn't stopped soon [View all]NotHardly
(2,705 posts)12. The "Social Contract"... for all those who are forgetful
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Social_Contract
and...
social contract, in political philosophy, an actual or hypothetical compact, or agreement, between the ruled or between the ruled and their rulers, defining the rights and duties of each. In primeval times, according to the theory, individuals were born into an anarchic state of nature, which was happy or unhappy according to the particular version of the theory. They then, by exercising natural reason, formed a society (and a government) by means of a social contract.
Although similar ideas can be traced to the Greek Sophists, social-contract theories had their greatest currency in the 17th and 18th centuries and are associated with the English philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke and the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. What distinguished these theories of political obligation from other doctrines of the period was their attempt to justify and delimit political authority on the grounds of individual self-interest and rational consent. By comparing the advantages of organized government with the disadvantages of the state of nature, they showed why and under what conditions government is useful and ought therefore to be accepted by all reasonable people as a voluntary obligation. These conclusions were then reduced to the form of a social contract, from which it was supposed that all the essential rights and duties of citizens could be logically deduced.
Theories of the social contract differed according to their purpose: some were designed to justify the power of the sovereign, while others were intended to safeguard the individual from oppression by a sovereign who was all too powerful.
and...
social contract, in political philosophy, an actual or hypothetical compact, or agreement, between the ruled or between the ruled and their rulers, defining the rights and duties of each. In primeval times, according to the theory, individuals were born into an anarchic state of nature, which was happy or unhappy according to the particular version of the theory. They then, by exercising natural reason, formed a society (and a government) by means of a social contract.
Although similar ideas can be traced to the Greek Sophists, social-contract theories had their greatest currency in the 17th and 18th centuries and are associated with the English philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke and the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. What distinguished these theories of political obligation from other doctrines of the period was their attempt to justify and delimit political authority on the grounds of individual self-interest and rational consent. By comparing the advantages of organized government with the disadvantages of the state of nature, they showed why and under what conditions government is useful and ought therefore to be accepted by all reasonable people as a voluntary obligation. These conclusions were then reduced to the form of a social contract, from which it was supposed that all the essential rights and duties of citizens could be logically deduced.
Theories of the social contract differed according to their purpose: some were designed to justify the power of the sovereign, while others were intended to safeguard the individual from oppression by a sovereign who was all too powerful.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
4 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
118 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
How did every fucking law enforcment agency in the country get roped in to supporting the fucking asshole? HOW?
Initech
Feb 2025
#42
FBI agents Association congratulates Director and acting director supporting trump on Jan 21., 2025
Bluethroughu
Feb 2025
#56
Just waiting until the fire truck gets to your burning home is not a good idea.
Think. Again.
Feb 2025
#61
Well, when he comes for your guns maybe you will believe he doesn't give a rat's
travelingthrulife
Feb 2025
#72
I'm sure Lloyd Austin and Joe Biden are on this, making key calls to key military leaders about what to do.
ancianita
Jan 2025
#17
Hope so. If I know that national security team (based on Woodward's transcript based book).
ancianita
Jan 2025
#25
Who can stop him? He has the presidency, the Supreme Court and Congress are all behind this takeover.
dem4decades
Jan 2025
#6
I figure direct action has to occur in the next 3 weeks, or the country-as-we-knew-it is gone in 6 months
0rganism
Jan 2025
#9
Do you think there are high level talks going on between Dem leaders - former Presidents and administration officials?
cilla4progress
Jan 2025
#11
There is a conference building for a national workers movement based on distrust of both parties and their loyalty to
LT Barclay
Feb 2025
#106
No one really knows this. No one. Just because folks don't see anything happening does not mean nothing's happening.
ancianita
Jan 2025
#29
If you think some out of office, constitutionally/legally powerless white knight(s)
RockRaven
Jan 2025
#30
Ever been in this situation in US history? No. Tell you what. If you think some lawless officers are going to win,
ancianita
Feb 2025
#31
It was too late on November 5th. We're simply at the watch it burn stage now.
LonePirate
Feb 2025
#55
You are defending a fascist agenda. You said are these things bad? Maybe, maybe not.
Doodley
Feb 2025
#103