The Instigator
Michael_Davis356934
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Sgt4Liberty
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Is there proof of a real unspoken contract between a government and its citizens?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/12/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 391 times Debate No: 86514
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Michael_Davis356934

Pro

The Social-Contract theory says that we as humans are cruel and act only in ways that will improve our way of life, in short we are naturally selfish. Thus there is a natural need for a governing institution that will provide social order to its citizens. In return the citizens are morally and legally obligated to abide by the rules set by their government or face some sort of punishment.
I believe that this "social-contract" is unspoken, due to the fact that we do not sign any paper or agreement that states: I,[name], hereby promise to follow the rules, laws, and any regulations set by my government; and if I willingly choose not to obey them, I understand that I must face some kind of sanction as a punishment for my refusal to follow the rules....
We automatically follow these rules because we understand the implications of our negative actions, and realize that the government is punishing us to maintain social order, the very reason we formed a government.

I appreciate your response to this post and look forward to your resulting debate and opinion.
Sgt4Liberty

Con

There is no imaginary contract that makes us liable for the rules and regulations of a society. The contractual obligation is derived from our Citizenship. When you're born, a corporate identity is made in your name and your birth certificate is deposited in the treasury. When your birth certificate was recorded with the Department of Commerce, a U.S. citizen, corporate entity was created, so he could be taxed and regulated in commerce. This was the property of the federal government by usurpation. Therefore all the property of the U.S. citizen was now the property of the government! You are just the mere user of the property, by virtue of the government. The U.S. citizen was created to generate revenue. Your government is usurping your property, so it can generate revenue to pay its bankruptcy debts!
http://usa-the-republic.com...

There are also several other forms of contractual obligations that we pursue in our lives that we don't generally look at as a contract because we weren't told it was a contract.
(Drivers License, Marriage License, SSN, TIN, Business licenses, vehicle registrations/titles, etc.). All of these things are contractual obligations in which the government tries to make us liable, and under their authority in laws regarding these things.
https://www.youtube.com...

The next thing you need to ask yourself is "Do I need these things to operate in society"? You can void out all of these contractual obligations and still operate in society. Will it be a little more difficult? Sure, as everyone is trained and led to believe that these are just natural things we have to do in life, but the fact of the matter is we do not. We don't need any of the these contracts, and as a matter of a fact, none of the laws operate under the Constitution, they operate on "Statutes". Statutes operate under contractual obligation, but do they apply to us? No they don't, unless you agree to it. They don't magically apply under some "Social Contract". We no longer operate under Common Law Jurisdiction as was intended under the Constitution, but it doesn't mean we need to accept their statutes or contracts. The choice is yours.

Once we realize that we don't need government, and that they actually need us, it'll be much easier to reclaim our sovereignty and become free people like our founding fathers intended for us.

http://www.abodia.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Michael_Davis356934

Pro

Michael_Davis356934 forfeited this round.
Sgt4Liberty

Con

"The Social-Contract theory says that we as humans are cruel and act only in ways that will improve our way of life, in short we are naturally selfish."

We know humans are selfish, but is that even a bad thing? We MUST be selfish for our own survival.

Also, humans are not naturally cruel. If this was the case, then ALL humans would be murderers, and rapists, and thieves, etc.

"Thus there is a natural need for a governing institution that will provide social order to its citizens. "

Completely subjective opinion. Not only that, no evidence is provided here. MANY people know there is no need for a governing body, mainly because they fear defensive force, i.e. self defense. Why don"t more people rob and kill old people? Because they are afraid old farmer Johnson has a 12 gauge or a colt 45 tucked into his waistband. They also believe it is wrong, either because they morally believe it, or because their religion gives them the basis for these beliefs, or because they simply know it is wrong. The law is simply an opinion with a gun.

"In return the citizens are morally and legally obligated to abide by the rules set by their government or face some sort of punishment. "

Show me, in detail, how and why I"m morally obligated to obey ANYONE ON THIS ENTIRE PLANET. Am I morally obligated to go fight in Iraq for WMD"s? Am I morally obligated to accept abortion as natural? Am I morally obligated to not touch a plant, a weed that grows in nature, because I live in a certain area inside magical invisible borders? Am I morally obligated to accept the fact that the government spies on literally any and everything we do? Am I morally obligated to not collect rainwater because some government bureaucrat decided it might be a bad thing? Am I morally obligated to keep my mouth shut, simply because it is illegal, if I"ve seen war crimes with my own eyes, and participated in them, and watched as the media and the public were given specific information that is completely contrary to the truth?

See, the problem here is that morality is being confused with ethics. I have no moral or ethical obligation or duty to anyone who lay his hand upon me as an unwanted ruler. I have no moral or ethical obligation or duty to anyone who would take people selling their bodies (their property), or someone committing a "crime" that literally harms no one, and putting them into a rape cage and ruining their lives, their ability to find work, their ability to find a place to live, and so on. I have no moral or ethical obligation or duty to anyone who pretends to have ownership over other people without their consent, knowledge, or even ability to revoke that power.

"I believe that this "social-contract" is unspoken, due to the fact that we do not sign any paper or agreement that states:"

Subjective opinion, but bold of you to put it out there.

I believe it goes something like this:

"I believe that this "social contract" has been written about by many great men, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and more. Unfortunately this "contract" has no basis in reality, legality, morality, or ethics."

"I,[name], hereby promise to follow the rules, laws, and any regulations set by my government; and if I willingly choose not to obey them, I understand that I must face some kind of sanction as a punishment for my refusal to follow the rules"."

This is up to you, but let me ask you this:

Have you ever been to a law library in D.C.? If you haven"t, google a picture of it. To make my point short and sweet, the United States has more laws, rules, and regulations on the books more than any society in the history of mankind. Michigan just became the 15th state to outlaw oral and anal sex, COMPLETELY. Will you obey these laws? Will you turn in your fellow citizens for not obeying these laws?

"We automatically follow these rules "

We absolutely do not, because we know 99% of them are insane nonsense. Ever drive above the speed limit?

" and realize that the government is punishing us to maintain social order"

Spontaneous order is real. I suggest you check it out sometime. It"s not a catch all or fix all as some would have you believe, but it"s real and it works in a lot of ways. This is also the worst case of Stockholm Syndrome I"ve ever seen. If you are confused, read some of my prior examples above. Another quick example that should be pretty obvious, I hope you are not a homosexual, for the sake of actually being an equal citizen and being treated like a human being by this government you seem to feel the obligation to obey and expect others to obey as well.

"the very reason we formed a government."

The government was formed (the U.S. government) because people were being oppressed. Problem is they created another oppressive government.

Try not to feel offended. I made my best attempt not to ad hom. These arguments are not aimed to insult, but rather to attack your specific arguments with ferocity, because this idea demands it. Unfortunately it"s not just your opinion, but rather the belief in this "social contract" (but mainly the belief in authority) that causes untold amounts of suffering and human death. Drone strikes, wars, nation building, and more proves this point pretty easily.

"Whoever lay his hand on me to govern me is a usurper and a tyrant: I declare him my enemy."

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
Debate Round No. 2
Michael_Davis356934

Pro

Michael_Davis356934 forfeited this round.
Sgt4Liberty

Con

Does this count?





Debate Round No. 3
Michael_Davis356934

Pro

Michael_Davis356934 forfeited this round.
Sgt4Liberty

Con

Sgt4Liberty forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Mhykiel 1 year ago
Mhykiel
People seek security for their needs. Government institutions employ people. Those people then make legislation in which they can gain security. Because more people are secured by government than not, the mighty inflict power over the rest.

There is no contract. It is an emergent property of people to use force to attain privilege.

but we accept the analogy of a social contract to debate the economic influences of individual actions. But truth is it is might makes right when it comes to a system in which one person has more security than another.
No votes have been placed for this debate.