Of Plunder, Theft, and Contract

03Dec09
Ahh, the social contract.

Sooner or later all pseudo intellectual collectivists trot out social contract theory as their trump card. Because I must give up some of my rights as they exist in nature to enjoy the benefits of society, I must have no rights that society does not bestow upon me.

That argument, of course, is fallacious.

My rights are inborn. The social contract is the voluntary exercise of individual rights by a group. I lend some of my rights to government in a mutually beneficial exchange, to achieve goals in a scale that I could not achieve myself in a timely manner. Individual rights exercise by a group. This is the nature of group effort.

For example, I have the individual right to defend my life and that property that is essential to sustain my life. Defending my life is a full time job, and I could scarcely accomplish anything else, so I choose to lend my right of defense to a group effort to accomplish my goals. I call them the police, and the military.

Infrastructure, basic government services are much the same. Things that I could achieve myself, but choose not to. They are the only proper place of government.

But because the rights I lend to the group are individual rights, the group cannot possess any right that the individuals behind it do not. Therefore the right of the group cannot supersede the right of individuals.

If you as an individual need something that I have, you do not have the right to take that thing for your use because that would be a violation of my rights. So why would the group have the right to take that thing from me, and give it to you? They do not.

If they choose to do so anyway, my participation in the contract is no longer voluntary. They have both coerced me, and violated my rights. The contract is invalid.

It is my right to establish a new contract, a new group to govern society.