Wednesday, September 13, 2006
False Construct of the Day: Social Contract
Social Contract: Something that was never, and can never be a contract, used by Locke and Hobbes to make their theories sound correct.
A contract that is "signed" by not leaving a "country" at birth? conception? once one learns to read? at voting age? (and living in the middle of an ocean somewhere) that "gives" "rights" to the unsigned, that can be changed at any time for any circumstances by that country. Violation of "contract" can result in a punishment to the unsigned, which is not specified, and subject to change, depending on coordinates within the "state," the prevailing fashion of the ruling class, and how many drinks the judge had for lunch. Most importantly, it grants a portion of all money earned by the unsigned, and a portion of the value of anything the unsigned owns, depending on how well the sports team related to the coordinates of the unsigned's home, is doing, in exchange for pristine roads, sidewalks, and a simply fabulous education.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
You forgot clean running water and sewers, without which, I would not have enough neighbors to make sewers a requirement.
Other than that, I would have to say, "By George, I believe she's got it! The atmospheric precipitation on the Iberian peninsula is encountered, by and large, on the pampas." If you believe that, I have a bridge you might like to buy!
"Got to install microwave ovens...custom kitchen delivery...."
Breakerslion, that has to be the stupidest thing you've said so far. You seriously think people wouldn't want clean water and sewers? I seriously overestimated your intelligence.
Where did I say that people wouldn't want clean water and sewers? You're getting prematurely senile Franc. I was merely commenting on this:
"...in exchange for pristine roads, sidewalks, and a simply fabulous education."
PS: The assumption that I or my ancestors would survive the Cholera, etc. (caused by hypothetical lack of sanitation systems) and my neighbors would not, is egocentric and is expressed for curmudgeonly amusement purposes only. It does not form the basis of any wishful thinking or belief system on my part.
Does that help?
Post a Comment