Showing posts with label social contract. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social contract. Show all posts

Sunday, October 22, 2017

The contractarian libertarian

Libertarianism and contractarianism - The Washington Post - John Thrasher, The Volokh Conspiracy:

September 20, 2017 - "Liberalism (in the classical sense) and its more austere cousin libertarianism, are fundamentally doctrines that put personal and political freedom at the heart of things ... typically understood as freedom from government and social interference so that one can exercise one’s freedom to live the life of one’s choosing. Equality is crucial in securing freedom insofar as we understand equality as equality of fundamental rights to non-interference....

"It is a commonplace to argue, as Thomas Nagel did in an early review of Robert Nozick’s epoch-making Anarchy, State, and Utopia, that the libertarian and classical liberal focus on rights is 'without foundations.' Although this criticism is fundamentally mistaken, it is an unsurprising allegation given the preferred intuitionistic method of many of the most important philosophical libertarians....

"I argue that libertarians and liberals should embrace a contractual method of justification.... The core rights that define the freedom and equality of members of a free society are or would be, on this view, the result of an agreement between rational individuals for the purpose of mutual benefit....

"[T]he state of nature and contractual consent are not accurate descriptions of the history of political organization. This criticism, however, misunderstands the basic idea behind social contract theory: to model how a genuinely voluntary and mutually beneficial society would be structured.... The social contract acts as a tool to evaluate existing and possible social rules and institutions.

"Contractual theory, pursued this way, aims to bring the mutually beneficial power of market exchange to social governance. But ... David Gauthier notes in Morals by Agreement, 'before Smith’s invisible hand can do its beneficent work, Hobbes’s war of every man against every man must first be exorcized' (85). Markets require a foundation in basic norms of trust and the assurance that one’s rights are secure. This requires, at least initially, credible enforcement and governance mechanisms. This governance can be achieved in any number of ways, however, not all of which require explicit political institutions.... Indeed, the long-term project of the libertarian contractarian should be to investigate how forms of genuine self-government can realize, in modern societies, the contractarian goals of voluntariness and mutual benefit....

""The contractual approach helps to solve two perennial problems in libertarian and liberal theory ... the foundational problem of whether to base libertarian conclusions on some deontological basis (e.g., natural rights) or to adopt a consequentialist justification [and] how to adjudicate between the anarchist and minimal government strands in libertarian thought....

"[T]he contractual approach preserves a focus on the consequences of political institutions that many find appealing in consequentialist or utilitarian theory....  Similarly, the contractual method, based on rational agreement, provides a justification for rights that doesn’t rely on controversial foundations. This, as I argue more fully in Social Contractarianism, makes the contractual approach uniquely attractive....

"I also argue that the contractual approach can dissolve another traditional dispute between classical liberals and libertarians; whether ... libertarians are really committed to anarchism.... The contractual libertarian can admit that there is no moral obligation or duty to obey the state, but that in a free and open society with institutions that can meet the contractual test, there are good reasons to endorse the laws and social norms of such a society....

"Agreement is the only basis of a free society. These agreements must be voluntary and reflect our perceived interests. A society built on this model would be as close to a truly voluntary society as we could ever hope."

Read more: http://gdspoliticalanimal.blogspot.ca/2017/10/libertarianism-and-contractarianism.html
'via Blog this'

Saturday, January 14, 2017

Does the 'social contract' mandate paying taxes?

Social Contract: The myth - George J. Dance, Nolan Chart:

January 12, 2017 - "For a long time, libertarian thought was mainly ignored. Then came a period of articles making fun of those silly libertarians wanting to ‘privatize sidewalks’ and the like. Now it seems that we are definitely in the ‘fight’ stage. Not a week goes by without some article on the Web bitterly assailing libertarians and libertarian ideas.

"Normally I ignore; but a while ago I read a most remarkable article that calls for comment: “The Libertarian Delusion” by a Mr. James Luko. What is remarkable is not that Luko dislikes libertarian ideas – his biography does identify him as a career bureaucrat, after all – but how he argues against them.

"Luko takes umbrage with an earlier article,'The Delusion of Consent' by libertarian James Goodfellow, who argues that the power to tax is illegitimate because it is based on coercion; to which Luko responds:
this does not make it true just because Libertarians say so. There is a big difference in what libertarians assert as government being coercive and having a government which uses force legitimately…. If the government’s use of force was NOT legitimate – the author would be correct, but since it is legitimate then the author is incorrect.
"What makes government’s use of force legitimate, according to Luko, is something called the 'social contract':
“The Delusion of Consent” soundly ignores the theory of Social Contract, whereas the author asserts that collection of taxes is plunder, stealing, illegitimate coercion…. where coercive action is taken in relation to taxes, and the implicit threat of its use by the state, is NOT plunder nor illegitimate delegation of power – but rather “enforcement of a contract” that in return for government goods and services – one pays taxes…. The author’s argument ignores the theory of social contract, yet, that is what the author himself participates in.
"Indeed, if it were true that Goodfellow and other libertarians have all agreed to pay taxes, and even made a contract to do so, then they should just shut up and pay up. But, of course, a claim is not true just because Luko says so, either. So, since Luko urges us to 'separate rationalism from empiricism,' and since his claims that this 'social contract' exists and that we all participate in it are undoubtedly empirical, let us see what empirical evidence he offers for them. Before we do that, though, it may be useful to take a look at what exactly that 'contract' is supposed to be."

Read more: https://www.nolanchart.com/social-contract-the-myth
'via Blog this'