5 ms·
Of course it doesn't refer to a literal contract. But a non-literal contract has no binding, so under what crazy-land definition of justice can the state use it
by pitaj 10y ago
Of course it doesn't refer to a literal contract. But a non-literal contract has no binding, so under what crazy-land definition of justice can the state use it to deem its actions of taxation, conscription, etc as just?
- ajkjk 10y agoIt really sounds like you have a mental model of the 'social contract' concept that isn't aligned with what it means for everyone else. To be clear, it says that we (possibly tacitly/implicitly) agree to give up some freedoms to the government in exchange for their governance/defense/etc. It has nothing to do with the enforceable contracts and things you sign. It just frames the relationship between government and constituents in terms of an agreement. So if we give up certain freedoms in this agreement (such as the 'right to not be taxed'), then it's not unjust - we have (tacitly, implicitly) consented to this. It's true that you the individual might not have consented, and might not have the means to leave if you don't like it. But the collective is consenting, and can change the constitution if they change their mind. So taxation is not inherently unjust if the state's constitution says it can tax you by definition. You might think the social contract that we're using is bad, or that the constitution is bad, and that's fine, and you can change it democratically if enough people agree with you. But 'unjust' doesn't really work.
- pitaj 10y ago> if the state's constitution says it can tax you by definition I wasn't aware that the state defines what is just and what is not. Does that mean that there are no unjust laws?
- ajkjk 10y agoThe constitution defines what it just. Laws can be unjust.
- pitaj 10y agoThe constitution is a law. It is the supreme law, by its own definition.
- ajkjk 10y agoJust as an exercise, do you think you can write down my counterargument? It's not hard to see what I'll probably say. edit: here, I'll help you. For part (a) of this question, list four different meanings of the word 'law', and give an example of each. For part (b), describe what the word 'just' means when applied to each definition from part (a). (Hint: they are all different.)
- pitaj 10y agoYou first.
- ajkjk 10y agoOf course not. The point is to see if you have any idea what the words you're using mean.
- pitaj 10y agoWhat, you just expect me to put words in your mouth? I don't even know how a conversation in my own head is going to go. I really expected more of HNers.
- ajkjk 10y agoIf you knew anything about our government and how it works and why it was designed the way it was, it would be trivial. If you don't, why do you think you know better without doing your research?