Friday, August 18, 2006

"You see, we all live under an implied social contract..."

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting


Lifted from Adrian Marza's blog, There is No Government Like NO Government (among others):

SOCIAL CONTRACT

Between an individual and the United States Government

WHEREAS I wish to reside on the North American continent, and WHEREAS the United States Government controls the area of the continent on which I wish to reside, and WHEREAS tacit or implied contracts are vague and therefore unenforceable,

I agree to the following terms:

SECTION 1: I will surrender a percentage of my property to the Government. The actual percentage will be determined by the Government and will be subject to change at any time. The amount to be surrendered may be based on my income, the value of my property, the value of my purchases or any other criteria the Government chooses. To aid the Government in determining the percentage, I will apply for a Government identification number that I will use in all my major financial transactions.

SECTION 2: Should the Government demand it, I will surrender my liberty for a period of time determined by the government and typically no shorter than two years. During that time, I will serve the Government in any way it chooses, including military service in which I may be called upon to sacrifice my life.

SECTION 3: I will limit my behavior as demanded by the government. I will consume only those drugs permitted by the Government. I will limit my sexual activities to those permitted by the Government. I will forsake religious beliefs that conflict with the Government’s determination of propriety. More limits may be imposed at any time.

SECTION 4: In consideration for the above, the Government will permit me to find employment, subject to limits that will be determined by the Government. These limits may restrict my choice of career or the wages I may accept.

SECTION 5: The Government will permit me to reside in the area of North America which it controls. Also, the Government will permit me to speak freely, subject to limits determined by the Government’s Congress and Supreme Court.

SECTION 6: The Government will attempt to protect my life and my claim to the property it has allowed me to keep. I agree not to hold the Government liable if it fails to protect me or my property.

SECTION 7: The Government will offer various services to me. The nature and extent of these services will be determined by the Government and are subject to change at any time.

SECTION 8: The Government will determine whether I may vote for certain Government officials. The influence of my vote will vary inversely with the number of voters, and I understand that it typically will be minuscule. I agree not to hold any elected Government officials liable for acting against my best interests or for breaking promises, even if those promises motivated me to vote for them.

SECTION 9: I agree that the Government may hold me fully liable if I fail to abide by the above terms. In that event, the Government may confiscate any property that I have not previously surrendered to it, and may imprison me for a period of time to be determined by the Government. I also agree that the Government may alter the terms of this contract at any time.

_____________________________

Signature

_____________________________

Date

Copyright 1989 by Robert E. Alexander.

May be distributed freely.


***********************************

I never signed it. Would you? Is a contract valid if signed at the bad end of a gun? Look it up.


8 comments:

JC said...

Hi Alleee. Sorry this is a negative comment, because I really like most of the stuff you have on your blog and your podcast.

This is a myopic and sarcastic look at the role of government. While I and most people would agree that our situation is less than ideal (by a long shot), when compared with most of human history, it is not such a bad compromise. Complete freedom from government results in each person and family being vulnerable to whatever tyrant or bully comes along with more buddies with bigger sticks or more rocks to harm or kill us and take our stuff and our family. Laws seem to be necessary to deal with people who would take advantage of the weak or unprepared. With laws come law enforcement. With that comes government, which brings politicians (the present version of which are much more benign than historical ones). Politicians create new laws, lots of demagoguery and hypocrisy, etc., but what else can you do? The only way to impose a better system is by tyranny. But you need a bigger and better army to beat the government in place now. Good luck with that!

Hellbound Alleee said...

You better fucking believe it's sarcastic.

You've got to be kidding me. You don't see who exactly has the biggest sticks and rocks RIGHT NOW, GUNS, TASERS, and uses them against us? The bully that we never signed the protection deal against? And you're actually saying to me that this monopolized gang is what we have to live with, because somehow it's a better gang than the other gang? Tell me you're kidding me, JC. Just tell me.

"take advantage of the weak or unprepared."

And who is doing this right now, JC?

"but what else can you do? "

That's right, JC, because you're on the bad end of the gun the bullies are pointing at YOU.

"But you need a bigger and better army to beat the government in place now. Good luck with that!"

Can't you people ever think beyond violence? You're saying that might makes right. You have a myopic and sad view of the world we live in, and the people in it. Most of your life is lived anarchistically, but it seems you're resolved to live under such violence.

Good luck with that.

Francois Tremblay said...

JC: Seriously, you are a total idiot. Complete imbecile. You don't have the foggiest idea of what you're talking about, and yet you see fit to explain at length the incredible propaganda-churned beliefs that you have in your imbecilic head.

JC said...

Francois, if name calling is your response, then you obviously have no argument. You are being just like established religions that, when faced with an idea they cannot dispute, resort to attacking the character of the person stating the idea. What makes you the superior judge? Usually, whatever a person has to say is just that person's opinion, unless he/she is reciting a statement from someone else. Why is your opinion superior to another's? And how, exactly, is it that you are qualified to call anyone an idiot or imbecille? Those are medical terms, in case you didn't know. Your own opinions appear to come from some propaganda machine, perhaps one of your own making. From listening to your podcasts, I had the impression that perhaps you liked to discuss ideas, not just find sycophants to agree with you for your own ego gratification, and to personally attack anyone who disagrees. In response to your comment, I say that you are a fucking asshole. That, of course, is not a medical diagnosis, it is just a preliminary hypothesis based on evidence. P.S. Fuck off.

Alleee, thanks for being civil in your disagreement. I think you are a little too optimistic, though, to believe that serious social and political change is likely to occur without any violence. It never has in the past, so why is it likely to in the future? Changing the social order through the existing political system will not result in what you want, because others will not want what you want, and all parties have to compromise to make any progress. Western-style democracies guarantee that everyone will be unhappy. The anarchy that many people long for cannot stand for very long. Someone will impose order. I just hope it is not Francois, the compassionate.

ryan maddox said...

jc, you love violence, social chaos, and you hate freedom, logic, and consistency.

Why is it that we should take anything you say seriously?

breakerslion said...

"jc, you love violence, social chaos, and you hate freedom, logic, and consistency."

Straw man.

breakerslion said...

... or maybe ryan is a fortune-teller?

ryan maddox said...

so what if I made a few assertions. It's not as if they were wrong.

Can you actually point out any straw mans using logic and consistency? If you can, please point them out, and I will apologise and renounce my belief in anarchy.

Oh, and by the way, I am a fortune teller....