Imagine, a scenario where there are no 'nation states'.
I am simply 'a citizen of the world'.
But in that world there will still be 'divisions'. [.....i image ! ]
e.g.
There are people who are weak and people who are poor.
And there are people who are strong and people who are wealthy.
QUESTION/SCENARIO;In such a world, i am a weak person.
Q.In such a world, should i submit to those around me who are stronger than me ?
e.g.
In such a world, what if i were to refuse to 'submit', if am told by a stronger 'fellow citizen' that i must submit to his demands ?
And, if i were to be 'raped' by someone who is stronger than myself, what recourse would i have, against those [in society] who are the strong, and the privileged ?
END OF SCENARIOWithin a society of men, those who are strong, or, wealthy, can always 'buy' social privilege, and/or, power and influence.
Can you imagine a world of men, a society of men, ....where that is not so ?
Humanity has imagined a
Utopia.
But humanity has never [yet] produced a
Utopia.
Dictionary;
Utopia = = an imagined perfect place or state of things..
Quote:"Right is only in question between equals, and while the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must."
- Thucydides (460-400 B.C.) Greek Historian
.
---------- >
Quote:
Social Contract Theory Law and Legal Definition
Social contract theory is based on the idea of a contractual agreement between the individual and the state, under which the power of the sovereign is justified by a hypothetical social contract in which
the people agree to obey in all matters
in return for a guarantee of peace and security, which they lack in the warlike "state of nature" posited to exist before the contract is made.
.
AND......
Natural Law....
Quote:
"16. The state of war is a state of enmity and destruction; and therefore declaring by word or action, not a passionate and hasty, but sedate, settled design upon another man's life puts him in a state of war with him against whom he has declared such an intention, and so has exposed his life to the other's power to be taken away by him, or any one that joins with him in his defence, and espouses his quarrel; it being reasonable and just I should have a right to destroy that which threatens me with destruction; for by the fundamental law of Nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred, and one may destroy a man who makes war upon him, or has discovered an enmity to his being, for the same reason that he may kill a wolf or a lion, because they are not under the ties of the common law of reason, have no other rule but that of force and violence, and so may be treated as a beast of prey, those dangerous and noxious creatures that will be sure to destroy him whenever he falls into their power.
17. And hence it is that he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power does thereby put himself into a state of war with him; it being to be understood as a declaration of a design upon his life. For I have reason to conclude that he who would get me into his power without my consent would use me as he pleased when he had got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it; for nobody can desire to have me in his absolute power unless it be to compel me by force to that which is against the right of my freedom- i.e. make me a slave..."
Of the State of War
"....he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power does thereby put himself into a state of war with him;.....
......For I have reason to conclude that he who would get me into his power without my consent would use me as he pleased when he had got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it;"
Forum
Pages: 
