Do we need a new Social Contract?

The existing social contract is an implicit agreement that has been widely accepted, though not often fulfilled, for centuries and among the members of societies to cooperate for social benefits. The social contract includes the sacrifice of some individual freedoms in exchange for State protection. The agreement entails that all individuals in society are subjects of the State with the sole intention to collectively enforce social arrangements. Theories of a social contract became popular in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries among theorists such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, as a means of explaining the origin of government and the obligations of subjects. Unfortunately, the social contract, from its origin, was doomed to fail. Stanford’s Encyclopedia of Philosophy explains that: “The social contract theories all stressed that the justification of the state depends on showing that everyone would, in some way, consent to it. By relying on consent, social contract theory seemed to suppose a voluntarist conception of political justice and obligation: what counts as “justice” of “obligation” depends on what people agree to—whatever that might be.“ But as time passed, the so-called consent was transformed -by the State’ into a duty, an obligation, and so there was where fundamental freedoms perished. Today, we have a duty to agree to act according to the idea of the social contract, and if do not submit to it and the State, we are seen as heretics. Volunteerism became a duty, obligation and then coercion. But, what would a modern social contract look like? Today, most people have difficulty imagining what the future of society and labor will be like. It is estimated that 60% of students who sit today in primary school classrooms will work in professions that do not yet exist. Education systems are so bad, that there are minors who begin to say that as adults they want to be influencers or youtubers, although there are many resistances to consider it a profession. They do not realize that in order to be an influencer, a person needs to build their career and life first. What makes a job a job? How do we define a profession and what relationship does it have with a specific, progressive and defined trajectory over time? Work is not the same for everyone, nor is free time or employment. In general terms, work means finding solutions to the problems of others. What changes over time is the type of problems to be solved and the way to do it. The jobs we do, whether for a living, by vocation or both at the same time, occupy a significant proportion of our time, in addition to linking us to the productive system. If we produce, if you consider us part of the gear, we are also entitled to unemployment, casualty and the fruits of labor. We would say that this is part of the established social contract. The question is whether the time has come to review that agreement, and some macro trends indicate that we must do do and very quickly. Why has the social contract expired? Next we are going to see some of the symptoms that indicate that the social contract we had so far – known as labor, work in exchange for a salary – has been outdated for a long time. Every pact is based on some premises, and those that were used after World War II are either weak or do not exist anymore. The world has changed and every time it does it faster, however the role of work in our personal and collective life had stagnated. The only thing that is constant is change, so these trends have come to question it. If we take the simple version of progress, which is that things are improving every generation, we clearly see how the existing social contract has faded away. Opportunity Insights data reflect that 90% of those born in 1945 earned a better living than their parents. More recently, the ravages of the 2008 crisis are noticeable and young people who are 30 years old today live worse than those who were 30 a decade ago. The data confirm a stalemate never seen before; one that is even worse than the crisis of the 90s. The model that inspired the American New Deal of the 30s, and that was copied pretty much everywhere, was built on a very specific form of family, where income comes thanks to the husband and the wife is responsible for the household. Men and women both work today, although the incentive structure continues to penalize women who decide to bet on their professional career. Gender wage gaps also persist, although they are not purposely legislated or politically created in the private sector.  According to Oxfam, in order for a woman to earn the same annual salary as a man occupying the same position and exercising the same responsibilities, women need to work 50 more days. There are also gaps in leadership: 86% of companies are led by men.  I am not suggesting that equality of outcome should be legislated or mandated or that gender should be a factor to be considered when promoting anyone. But perhaps, merit and equality of opportunity, when taken into consideration together, could provide a better outcome for women who have equal or better skills to occupy a certain position. With the New Deal post World […] Read the rest below at the source link