H. Dawary
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2019
- Messages
- 565
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Anyone not familiar with what the Social contract is; It is a contract between the state and the individual(s). It is the idea of individual(s) who have surrendered some of their rights in return for protection of their remaining rights.
Now this contract can come about naturally in which it was the case with for example the Quraysh tribe in which all co-existed with each other and in time had a contract for mutual safety and defence against outside threats. Or it came about through an actual alliance which was the case with the Iroquois confederacy and later the American Union.
Where nations experience much disturbance is because it goes back to this original contract, which is what we are seeing with India's Kashmir, especially more so after they have nipped bills 370 and 35a, and also with Kurdish dominated regions.
Nations who wish to find a solution to such problems can deal with this problem with these two solutions; The first option is to have a contract in which there wasn't one to begin with otherwise the problem will subsist with generations to come, the second option is to send in colonies to the area and these colonies must agree to the contract from the area of which they previously came from.
Of recent times we've seen the first with Canada's Quebec in which they would have been promised their own Quebecois should they have won by majority vote, which they did not, and tensions which previously existed there were settled democratically. The second we've seen is with China's Xinjiang province, of which they've sent their colonies from the mainland into the area and made that area much more stable over the years. However, sending in colonies takes time and effort and can't be done all at once otherwise it would create a great lot of stress.
The second option often prevails with dictatorships or about to be dictatorships, will we perhaps see the first option overruled by the second option in prevailing in times to come, or will humanity grow a conscience and head towards the first option? Will dictatorship become a growing phenomenon or will human rights prevail in the end? Any thoughts?
Now this contract can come about naturally in which it was the case with for example the Quraysh tribe in which all co-existed with each other and in time had a contract for mutual safety and defence against outside threats. Or it came about through an actual alliance which was the case with the Iroquois confederacy and later the American Union.
Where nations experience much disturbance is because it goes back to this original contract, which is what we are seeing with India's Kashmir, especially more so after they have nipped bills 370 and 35a, and also with Kurdish dominated regions.
Nations who wish to find a solution to such problems can deal with this problem with these two solutions; The first option is to have a contract in which there wasn't one to begin with otherwise the problem will subsist with generations to come, the second option is to send in colonies to the area and these colonies must agree to the contract from the area of which they previously came from.
Of recent times we've seen the first with Canada's Quebec in which they would have been promised their own Quebecois should they have won by majority vote, which they did not, and tensions which previously existed there were settled democratically. The second we've seen is with China's Xinjiang province, of which they've sent their colonies from the mainland into the area and made that area much more stable over the years. However, sending in colonies takes time and effort and can't be done all at once otherwise it would create a great lot of stress.
The second option often prevails with dictatorships or about to be dictatorships, will we perhaps see the first option overruled by the second option in prevailing in times to come, or will humanity grow a conscience and head towards the first option? Will dictatorship become a growing phenomenon or will human rights prevail in the end? Any thoughts?
