Social Contracts

Human interactions can, generally speaking, be reduced to either force or mutuality of respect. Arguments can be made as to where we draw that line but we behave in certain ways either because we feel forced to do so or because we wish to nurture respectful relationships.

If our behavior is based on wishing to have a society that functions in a manner which nurtures relationships we behave in a certain way regardless of whether or not there is a reasonable expectation of any further interaction. We might, for example, wave another car into line ahead of us, not because we know the other person or have any expectation of any further interaction but because we want society to be polite and cooperative because that makes everyone’s life better, including our own.

The political philosophers whose thoughts formed the thinking of our founders were deeply involved with the concept of a social contract. Hobbes, Locke, Hume, and Rousseau dealt with the question. Our founders were well acquainted with the political philosophy of a social contract. In a monarchy or a dictatorship force is the operating principle. In a democracy the operating principle is a functional social contract where citizens seek to maximize a healthy society for everyone, not the select few.

Rousseau put it simply, people living in society must, of necessity, establish agreements on moral and political rules of behavior in order to enhance mutual freedom. Ironically, unless we are able to live in nature away from others, we become free through obligatory behavior toward others.

When we boil down the thinking behind social contracts there is one absolute. Unless we wish to live under a dictatorship, it is imperative that the freedoms we desire for ourselves must be extended to all other citizens. Nothing is more critical to democracy than the principle that all citizens have equal rights under the law. There can be no equivocation or exception. It does not matter what a person’s race, financial status, political affiliation, place of origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability might be, all are each other’s equals under the law.

In our hyper-politicized world today that is absolutely critical to remember. Our political discourse has become not just partisan but crude and antithetical to rational social interactions.

Anyone charged with a crime has the absolute right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, they have the right to appropriate legal counsel. Condemnation of anyone as guilty prior to trial violates our social contract. However, it is also true that no person is above the law. Those on the lowest rungs of society are as deserving of justice as those on the highest.

Unfortunately, we have evolved into a society in which our basic social contract has frayed and those at the top are accorded more consideration. Instead of a Golden Rule we operate on the reality that those with the gold make the rules. It is past due time to collectively commit to repair of our social contract.