> Fine, don't call it a social contract. Are you saying that because you agree? Because that was the only point I was making.. We can all agree that gangs, ma

> Fine, don't call it a social contract. Are you saying that because you agree? Because that was the only point I was making.. We can all agree that gangs, mafias and cartels have collective power and use the threat of force to govern territories. The distinction we're making is whether these cartels constitute a "legitimate" government - whatever that means. I think legitimacy should be measured by consent (crazy idea I know), and that not leaving a territory doesn't constitute consent. Mexican families living in cartel-land do not give consent because they're too poor to leave. Because a said cartel provides "protection" from other cartels does not mean a service was provided. I'm just asking people reason about government in principle, rather than in terms of what they think a government should be.