So, this is primarily related to political and economic consent, not the idea of sexual consent, but there are obviously parallels that can be drawn there.
So....we love to be a society that claims everything is consensual and voluntary. If you dont like society, go live in the woods. If you dont want a job, you dont have to work, no one is making you. But in reality, those ideas are models.
The idea of the social contract is a philosophical model of governance stemming back to like the 16th-17th century, but in reality, it's a bit of a myth. As I've discussed before, in reality, modern states arose by force, and are enforced by force. So we claim consent, when in reality people are effectively forced to participate in society, with little to no actual dissent, especially organized dissent. Any group that wishes to be separatist is going to be crushed and conquered by states sooner or later. Look at the native americans, or the paris commune, and before people mention the zapatistas of mexico or the rojavas in syria, theyre only allowed to live because its too difficult for states to conquer them. So that isnt an option for many. People are forced to operate under states and their political and economic models. And given capitalism has been forcibly exported to most of the planet, few are given a real choice to not consent to it. They're forced to operate under this model whether they like it or not. They're forced to respect the property regime that is enforced by literal men with guns. And that tends to make them operate under a "big casino" type situation to make a widerquist reference.
Which brings us to capitalism. People are forced to operate under capitalism and private property rights worldwide. They have little alternative, as much as some say people are free to live in the woods. Even if they could, is that the alternative? Is something okay just because someone consents to it and is better than the state of nature? I'd argue no. The point of the concept of progress is to make a state better and better for its subjects. To actively make their countries better places to live. To give people not just higher living standards as per capitalism and its obsession with growth and GDP, but also more freedom, less hardship, etc. We don't think about these metrics. Our modern political philosophy is obsessed with the words of people who lived 400 years ago, and who mostly operated under hypothetical ideas and not real world ideas.
If society exists to serve people, than mere consent to a social order is not enough to justify poor conditions. Morality isnt necessarily based entirely on consent of the governed, even if states are justified somewhat by consent. States have an active responsbility to make lives better for their constituents, and if they dont, that is a moral failing of theirs. The role of the state may change over time to account for these changing needs. At one point economic libertarianism used to be the ideal model for society, but as the failures of that ideology have shown through, we have expanded the role of the state to include regulating market relations and providing social programs to improve the lives of citizens. The concept of progress trumps the concept of mere consent. Because consent can be forced. COnsent to a modern state is effectively forced if all of the alternatives are crap, and consent to employment is also forced if the alternatives are crap. There needs to be a minimum baseline for consent to be even remotely justified. otherwise you're just using legalese to effectively enslave people. You know?
As such, consent needs to be freely given, with valid alternatives existing that dont make the concept forced. For the state, i dont think theres an answer. People are gonna be forced to live under states, the goal is to make them responsible to the people they govern and give them a morl requirement to actively make their lives better and to respect their freedom as much as possble. For employment, I think the state providing a dignified minimum standard of living is necessary for employment relations to be consensual.
And yeah, that's just some of the stuff I wanted to sketch out on the subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment