10 votes

Tom Woods: When Did I Sign This 'Social Contract'?

See the video here:

http://youtu.be/nTqEePlZiqk

Keep it handy for when you back someone into a philosophical corner and they puke up the social contract "argument."

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

social fiction

A contract is explicit and voluntary, or it is null and void.

"Social contract" has the same semantic content as "super-natural" or "public property."

dynamite anthrax supreme court white house tea party jihad
======================================
West of 89
a novel of another america
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/161155#longdescr

As much as I love

the relation you point out between "social contract" and "super-natural", I'm afraid I know lots of people who believe in both so pointing this relationship out to them wouldn't help. (Just check out how many "paranormal reality" shows are on TV these days... people must be watching them or the advertisers wouldn't support them. Then again, it can't cost much to wave a flashlight around in an abandoned house and pretend you hear things.)

Not sure "public property" really goes in the same group though -- it may be generally undesirable but at least it's possible for there to be such a thing. (I.e., there's such a thing as joint ownership of property, and public property could be just an extreme form of that. I tend to define property in terms of who really has control of it, though, in which case most stuff called "public property" these days probably isn't, and maybe that's what you were getting at?)

If it's null, how can it be void?

How can a non-existent bottle be empty?

I have always wondered, what precisely is the difference between null and void in legalese? I know what the difference is in C++.

Ĵīɣȩ Ɖåđşŏń

"Fully half the quotations found on the internet are either mis-attributed, or outright fabrications." - Abraham Lincoln

Thanks For The Funny Question

I never thought about it.

"Null" means "never existed" or "does not exist". "Void" means "rescinded". The phrase "Null and Void" is used in many court decisions but, based on your questions, why in that order?

Grammatically it would seem that it should be "Void and Null". Even that does not make sense - should be one or the other but not both.

So, the next time a judge tells you that something is "null and void", you should laugh at him and tell him that it can't be both.

Gene Louis
http://www.survivaloftheslickest.com/
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.

Got me Thinking Again

Here is a viable interpretation of "Null and Void"

The document (law or agreement) never existed, therefore the fake counterpart is rescinded.

Gene Louis
http://www.survivaloftheslickest.com/
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.

Error By User

Nothing here.

Gene Louis
http://www.survivaloftheslickest.com/
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.

Bump

I only agree that I have the Rights listed in the Constitution and those left to the people.

Free includes debt-free!

The rights listed in the Constitution and left to the people?

So, when the Constitution is amended, edited, or ignored you feel you don't have the rights listed therein? When 'the people' decide you no longer have those rights you feel you don't have them either?

Wow.

You feel free to give up whatever you want for yourself to whomever you please for whatever reasons you choose. But you have no right to demand that anyone else do the same.

I do not agree to your words, my rights stand never the less.

No lien can be be placed on my rights. They are unalienable.

Government offered to govern and the terms were listed in the Constitution. Officials who fail to uphold and defend the Constitution are guilty of treason.

The Patriot Act was an act of treason. Holding Americans in indefinite detention without due process is and act of treason. Taking the country to war without a declaration is treason. Taking troops to war without a declaration is treason by the generals. Homeland Security and the TSA was nothing but a treasonous activity from its inception.

Yet we keep electing representatives who have committed treason instead of sending them to the gallows.

Seems like you read a lot into my comment that I never intended or believed.

Free includes debt-free!