Proposal for a new social contract

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by LuckyR »

Elder wrote:
LuckyR wrote:For example, there are huge, I mean really huge parts of the current public sector that according to the OP would not be part of the new public sector, so what becomes of them? Are they switched to the private sector? Are they dropped altogether? I am speaking of say the military, the justice system, the penal system, roads, the post office, ports, regulatory agencies, education the list is quite long and the topics covered most would agree are critical to basic civilization as we know it.
Please reread the OP and you will find that ALL of these questions are already answered there.

The public sector is self contained, covering EVERYTHING that is required to satisfy basic needs, including police, firemen, etc., etc., etc.

No military is assumed in the scenario because, if at all it can ever be implemented, no military would be needed any more.

Again, the question is if you would like to live in a world as I described? Would it be better, fairer, more sustainable than the one we have now?

This is not communism I am proposing (even though a lot of people did take it seriously at one time or another -- some still do). This is a compromise situation that provides for both of our emotional needs: freedom and compassion.

If we don't consider something that was never tried before, we are destined to keep going around in circles, trying the same old and failed 'solutions' until we run out of time.

It is possible to think and look outside the box we have been locked in all our lives.
I know my eyesight is bad, but I am just not seeing these issues addressed in post #1. But no matter, I think you are dramatically insulting current public sector workers if you are proposing that random civilians without expertise and experience can do current public sector job responsibilities in 2-3 hours a day of volunteer work.

If your system was magically implemented, I would imagine that surrounding countries would either empty as their citizens streamed across the border to your country, or the neighboring country's leader attacked to quash this source of revolution within their own country. Nope, I think you're going to need a military.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Elder
Premium Member
Posts: 702
Joined: June 4th, 2015, 12:06 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Sandor Szathmari
Location: Canada

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by Elder »

LuckyR, I will now wait to see if anyone else has any contribution to this thread.

Many of the questions were already answered in the posts following the OP -- have you read them?

Many other questions were seriously and intelligently discussed on the TTA forum that I provided a link to in one of my posts on this thread.

See at: thethinkingatheist.com/forum/Thread-Pro ... l-contract

No point repeating them again.

If you are seriously interested, then please review them and think it over.

I have done what I could to make this suggestion conceivable -- I don't think I can do any more.

Done with it, for the time being. :bored:
I don't debate with the evaders, the hopelessly 'confused' or the too lazy to think -- life is too short!
Wilson
Posts: 1500
Joined: December 22nd, 2013, 4:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eric Hoffer
Location: California, US

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by Wilson »

Elder wrote:This proposal is NOT about what is possible right now, but about what could be desirable in the long run.

Without a clear idea of what we would like to achieve, we have no compass to follow to where we want to be.

But, I have said this so many times, there is no point repeating it again, over and over and over. :(
Theoretically that's a good approach - to imagine a world better than what we have now, and then try to work out steps to get there. But for me, and probably many others, some of us fairly serious thinkers, the end point has to seem at least vaguely plausible. Your proposal would require a change in human nature, it seems to me.

If a utopian concept that I like seems 10% possible, I'll jump in with both feet and offer ideas for implementation. If it seems 1% possible, I'll watch closely for further developments. But if it's only 0.001% likely, I'll find other ways to amuse myself.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by LuckyR »

Elder wrote:LuckyR, I will now wait to see if anyone else has any contribution to this thread.

Many of the questions were already answered in the posts following the OP -- have you read them?

Many other questions were seriously and intelligently discussed on the TTA forum that I provided a link to in one of my posts on this thread.

See at: thethinkingatheist.com/forum/Thread-Pro ... l-contract

No point repeating them again.

If you are seriously interested, then please review them and think it over.

I have done what I could to make this suggestion conceivable -- I don't think I can do any more.

Done with it, for the time being. :bored:
I apologize for being boring. I think I am giving you the impression that I am against your proposal based on your defensive posture. Far from it. I give you props for "thinking outside the box" and see my postings as proposing refinements and seeking details to make the general idea feasable/palatable to the general populace.

I anticipated that our conversation would be energizing and not draining. Sorry about that.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Elder
Premium Member
Posts: 702
Joined: June 4th, 2015, 12:06 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Sandor Szathmari
Location: Canada

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by Elder »

No problem, LuckyR, I also apologize for being impatient there for a minute.

I am just a bit tired of having to say the same things, over and over again.

It feels like I have to do all the work, when I have already done my share. The information is all there, in all the posts I mentioned and I suspect that no one actually read beyond the OP (or whatever part of the OP they read), let alone the other forum with all the answers I had had to carefully provide before.

Anyway, I think I am done with this thread, for the time being -- unless I see a real interest and real consideration of the entire topic, including the other posts I mentioned.

So, for the time being: over and out.

Thank you for discussing it with me. :)
I don't debate with the evaders, the hopelessly 'confused' or the too lazy to think -- life is too short!
User avatar
Elder
Premium Member
Posts: 702
Joined: June 4th, 2015, 12:06 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Sandor Szathmari
Location: Canada

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by Elder »

Wilson wrote:If a utopian concept that I like seems 10% possible, I'll jump in with both feet and offer ideas for implementation. If it seems 1% possible, I'll watch closely for further developments. But if it's only 0.001% likely, I'll find other ways to amuse myself.
Hundreds of millions of people were inspired by the idea of communism (some still are) and that idea would require a drastically bigger change to human nature than my proposal, which was designed to provide a compromise, satisfying both our fundamental needs: freedom and compassion.

Dozens of other people found it worth pursuing as you can see in the posts I provided links to.

Without trying something new -- we will repeat the same old pattern until we finally run out of time.

So much for the lack of amusement value in the proposal. :wink:
I don't debate with the evaders, the hopelessly 'confused' or the too lazy to think -- life is too short!
User avatar
PartisaNZ_1
New Trial Member
Posts: 5
Joined: October 1st, 2015, 3:43 am

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by PartisaNZ_1 »

I'm new to this forum. I'm enjoying this thread particularly. It is essentially why I joined. It intersects with a central question in my life, "How exactly would an ethical society operate? How might a moral world actually function?"

I'm a somewhat slow reader and have difficulty absorbing lengthy dissertations and maintaining long complex debates (so I hope I don't write one). I'm also not widely read on this subject, although I'm intending to read more. I do however have a 'reference' book I constantly return to, my little 'Bible', "Future of Man" by Frank E Warner (1944) which I may quote from. I hope that's okay.

Firstly, in the establishment of a new social contract I believe we must be very careful about a moneyless system (or perhaps about what replaces money?). If the heart of the matter is human labour and the economic valuation of human labour - or the degradation of human labour to the status of a commodity or "merchandise" - then an important question pertaining to how human labour might otherwise be 'valued' is, "What did money itself replace"? To paraphrase Warner, this non-human element money, in a more refined and intellectual form, plays the part which in ancient moneyless systems was performed by brute force. Labour was then performed by captives and slaves.

Money definitely has an up-side, even if this beneficial technical aid has also become "the evil genius of humanity". We must avoid the possibility of a reversion to brute force. This, of course, leads to many challenging questions, such as what might become a suitable means of exchange which is an evolutionary improvement upon money? One example Warner cites is a currency that has a time limit on its expenditure so that it cannot be stored indefinitely as capital.

Secondly, I wonder if some of the logistic difficulties of implementing a new social contract might be mitigated if individual nations were to cede some aspects of their 'sovereignty' to a World Federation of States or World State or 'United Nations'? (Even writing in 1944, with only the League of Nations as his example, Frank Warner foresaw something much better and even predicted intermediate forms such as a European Federation). This is not the place to discuss the ineffectuality of the current U.N. but one can contemplate how such a body might operate if all nations agreed to giving it certain inalienable powers? If the new social contract was a globally agreed one to begin with?

Thirdly, I think we are discussing a new social contract which, like all others, will a) take some considerable time to implement, perhaps several generations? And b) even once implemented, will maintain a considerable degree of flexibility? There will surely still be 'politics' in some form, in the sense that politics is a socially agreed method of creating, moderating, reconciling and implementing group decisions?

There will, of course, be so many technical and logistic issues. One that concerns me runs like this. I believe the system of supermarkets that already exists is a suitable method for food distribution to an entire population under a new or different social contract. However, will anyone bother to go along and operate the checkouts or restock (night-fill) the shelves if they are not impelled to by financial necessity (and the social iniquity that creates it)? Perhaps there are other ways of distributing the food? I guess the issue is that current economic and social organisation has created a great many jobs that people do not really want to do and possibly will not do if given the choice.

Elder, I enjoy your posts a lot. One thing I do wonder though is whether there are actual statistics of any kind regarding how many people were truly inspired by communism and how many were simply terrified into going along with it? It seems to me the major examples we have, Russia, China, North Korea, weren't or aren't really communism, but State Totalitarianism in the guise of and using the name communism? The present flight of Cubans back towards Americanism and 'capitalism' worries me. They may be better off isolated from it as they are now?

Anyhow, that's me thinking out loud down here in New Zealand for tonight (and I have written rather more than I set out to do).

Regards
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by LuckyR »

I don't disagree with the idea of a system where external limits are unnecessary since everyone has an internal set of codes that guide folks to a level of greater good both for the individual and for the society. That would be a Utopia. The question is: in the absence of the external rules, what do you do with outliers or those without the internal moral compass. Let's say they are 1% of a society (can you imagine a society with a 1% crime rate? That would still be a Utopia!!!), these folks could operate as wolves among sheep. You don't have to have very many conquistadors to lay waste to huge numbers of Incas.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Lucylu
Posts: 676
Joined: October 1st, 2013, 2:32 pm

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by Lucylu »

My main concerns regarding the essay of the OP are:

1. It presupposes that every human is basically the same. There is mention of age appropriate provisions for education, food and the like, but this does not appear to provide for outliers such as those with learning difficulties, health issues or specific talents.

2. If there is no financial benefit for doctors, for example, in the public sector over and above any other state worker doing their 2 or 3 hours a day, what incentive would a young person have to study the 8+ years of a medical degree?

3. The essay also appears to suggest that all problems will magically disappear, if we have our basic needs met. This is obviously untrue and wishful thinking. All children (where I live in the UK) are ensured a roof over their heads, no over crowding, free healthcare and free education, benefits for their parents if they are out of work, or ill, but none of these ensure that a child will not suffer illness, emotional or behavioural difficulties, learning difficulties or abuse.

If the majority are currently working a 30-40 hour week and we cannot rid society of ignorance or illness, how would everyone working 2-3 hours do this?

4. The essay suggests that doing the state required 2 hours per day will be satisfying for an adult. To me, this system would still create a poor 'state' supported tier of society and a rich capitalist tier of society (who look down on the former). There may be social stigma to being someone who works only 2 hours per day. How would it be any different from the current welfare system that many countries have for the out of work, for example?

5. Wouldn't it require a closed system (another myth), when we clearly live in a multinational interdependent system? To attempt to create a 'closed' system would require stopping immigration, and perhaps inadvertently force that country backwards in to a more insular, prejudiced society. As PartisaNZ_1 said, we must be careful not to step backwards.

6. Unfortunately, if the goods are free to take, then some enterprising person would probably just take everything and sell them on the 'black market'. Then, even the most honest person would be forced to take as much as possible, in case the next time they try to collect provisions there are none left. Not everyone is moral. The reasons for negative behaviour are not as simple as need.
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts". -Bertrand Russell
The Polkaroo
Posts: 28
Joined: December 28th, 2015, 1:48 pm

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by The Polkaroo »

What a wonderful idea this two tier system presents. How to implement such a structural change? As has already been stated, the entrenched corporate system will not go along with it. Rupert Murdoch networks will not go along with it. Convincing Joe the Plumber will be difficult for previously stated reasons. So how?

One of the criticisms of the ‘two-tier system’ is that our people are not culturally developed to live in such cooperation or to give up their current ‘freedoms’ for a different way of life. That’s probably true for the majority but, there is a growing part of the population with values and sensibilities conducive to this. There are also already mechanisms that these kinds of people could use to begin the foundation of a two-tier system. The trend towards living ‘off-grid’ in self-sustainable way. The Tiny House movement. Co-op housing. Community gardens and farmers markets. Car/ride share networks. Worker co-ops.

Proposal:

1. Through a selection process assemble a group of people based on a criteria of: Values and desires (not needing great deal of luxuries, willing social participant). Capital. Skills.

2. The selected group enter into a contractual agreement. I’m no lawyer but I imagine something like a limited partnership? Stipulates if the venture goes **** up you can recoup your investment.

3. With the collective capital the group will purchase land, equipment and materials.

4. With the labour build self sustainable homestead. Tiny homes, farm, workshop. Collectively run homestead.

5. Organize labour into worker co-ops.


Scenario:

The group consists of farmer, chef, butcher, engineer, carpenter, mechanic, plumber, welder. Some with families, some with spouses and some as bachelor/bachelorettes.

Having built the infrastructure and collectively working the land, the group has pooled their resources to provide themselves with basic food and shelter, a car/ride share for transportation. A good foundation for the first tier.

At this point members are free to engage outside the homestead in the current capitalist system. Provided they do not neglect their responsibilities to collectively maintain the homestead. However,this is an enterprising group that are excited about the potential of their self directed organized labour. Instead of seeking individual employment they form worker co-ops. The farmer, chef, and butcher collaborate to produce ‘seed to market’ products off the land. The welder and carpenter craft products like furniture and other useful implements largely with recycled material. Engineer and tradesman can collaborate on bids for manufacturing and construction projects. Manufacture tiny homes.
User avatar
Ranvier
Posts: 772
Joined: February 12th, 2017, 1:47 pm
Location: USA

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by Ranvier »

The problem with any Utopia is a presumption of understanding all the members of the society. People express a vast diversity of mood and priorities at any given time in their life. Something may work well for a single young individual, who is a social extrovert. The same individual later in life living with a spouse and two children may feel differently, and still differently after a divorce or a prolonged unemployment. The system would have to adjust quickly to the needs of the population. This is the problem with any system of governance, where people have to comply with the system rather than the other way around. This is a make belief philosophical exercise and not a realistic brainstorming session because in the current reality there is too much social distrust and individualistic agenda of profit. Someone may have a brilliant idea that will never be realized because it will be "squashed" by powers with vested interest to prevent such idea in arriving to fruition. Another problem is the prevention of the free flow of information in concern for profit or intellectual credit using the patent system and the copy right. For a true brainstorming session these issues would have to be taken under consideration.
Dissimulation
Posts: 37
Joined: March 23rd, 2017, 12:38 pm

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by Dissimulation »

This is an ideal iteration of a system of government that presupposes that all the conditions required are met or achievable. It assumes 6.5 billion individuals will all agree to restrict there freedom, abandon cultural traditions,laws, industry, individuality, existing and historical conflict, the means to protect themselves and all 6.5 billion have the trust that the entire population of the world will play by the same rules. The Government has complete autonomous power and demands the wealth of the private sector, the government dictates what is essential to the public sector, and it assumes that somehow a private industry could exist given that its wealth and resources are subject to confiscation at any time. Given limited resources and a growing population it seems improbable that a fair distribution could exist. Given that resources are allocated equally a private sector would have no market and fewer people willing to work for what amounts to nothing. Innovation would halt, given the restrictions of the system resources could not be allocated to new developments unless sanctioned by the Government. The only enforcement of law would be controlled by Government. A single all powerful government with complete control over enforcement of law, natural resources and rights to anything from any individual. Ideal political theories are incomplete, to many variables, unforeseen consequences and predominantly a complete absence of the human condition, which is vital given the system is intended to be developed, maintained and actualized by individuals for individuals. Even in an ideal form it ought to be achievable when regarding the governance of people. A second issue that is both necessary and as of yet has no solution is the transition from the world as it is to a single uniform government. Does your theory allow for a suspension of the principles it intends to govern by ? If not, how will you address the resignation of the worlds population to your theory? Kill or imprison all who oppose, censor ideas that conflict with your theory ? Absolute governance requires that all agree to its terms and conditions, essentially demanding all individual surrender freedom to a system that demands uniform adherence. what happens when a nation forms and declares sovereignty (no military to oppose)?
User avatar
Elder
Premium Member
Posts: 702
Joined: June 4th, 2015, 12:06 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Sandor Szathmari
Location: Canada

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by Elder »

If you don't bother to read the OP and the whole thread's discussion, why do you bother to comment on it?
If you did read it, then I suggest you use your brain and give yourself enough time to think it through.
Every one of your 'arguments' was already addressed before. Find them.
I don't debate with the evaders, the hopelessly 'confused' or the too lazy to think -- life is too short!
Dissimulation
Posts: 37
Joined: March 23rd, 2017, 12:38 pm

Re: Proposal for a new social contract

Post by Dissimulation »

Elder wrote:If you don't bother to read the OP and the whole thread's discussion, why do you bother to comment on it?
If you did read it, then I suggest you use your brain and give yourself enough time to think it through.
Every one of your 'arguments' was already addressed before. Find them.


Perhaps they were addressed but not to my satisfaction, your statement instead deflects any meaningful response and irrationally attacks (unsuccessfully) the 'straw man'. Perhaps you can take the time and recognize that arguments, though alike, are different and intended to determine or uncover particular aspects of the argument. Philosophical argument ought not to be misunderstood as a debate with winners and losers. Generally I would not respond however your statement is quite insulting to the philosophical tradition itself, few may fail to realize your response is an expression of an inadequacy not a meaningful response.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Politics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021