Hi, Bill Calcutt.

The western world was crazy to listen to Egalitarians like you, and naively import a terrorist advocating religion like Islam. And you are right, our democracy is now in danger of collapse from ethnic and religious separatism. As a matter of fact, it is already happening. On my way through Parramatta recently, there was a tall building with only the racist "aboriginal" flag on it. The only "utilitarian" way of controlling Islamic terrorism is now to increase the state security police and make changes to our cherished civil liberties.(like freedom of speech)

But us "racists" told you that decades ago, why didn't you listen to us?

You got the unstable multicultural country that you wanted, so what are you complaining about? If we had kept the White Australia Policy, we would now not be in this mess. This present shambles is what people like yourself got us into, and it was both predictable and avoidable.

If I said what I really thought about this rubbish, I would be banned for life. Shame on him!

This article is a peculiar mix of appeasement and psychobabble. True, though, about the imposition of global surveillance. The theocratic Fifth Column was imported in order to supply just enough terrorist incidents to enable the empowerment of a massive secret political police and surveillance industry over the whole population (e.g. ASIO) with the legislation and funding to support it. The same creeping surveillance state is engulfing the entire Western world by the same mechanism. Between the march of Islam and the march of political police totalitarianism the public are being seriously screwed until enough voices are raised to call a halt to it. The first step is to challenge the conflation of race and religion wherever that conflation is bandied about (e.g.by ABC) and to recognise that culture ennobles and unites whereas "cultures" stultify and divide.

Alienated youth? And that's justification for terrorism and attacking the innocent? Alienation? What, like when Mum says no, I won't support your self imposed smoking/drug/ice habit! Nor accept the antisocial behavior that it and being spoiled rotten engenders?

Kids aren't born bad to the bone but learn it as learned inculcated behavior! From parents and their example initially, then so called peer pressure! Some of it acceptable in a society that not only sets itself apart, but seeks to replace the dominant culture, via patently invented issues!?

I could take my kids anywhere an be repeatedly complemented on their good manners and behavior!

As for states reserving force for themselves? Well why not?

After all if ordinary folk had the right to effectively defend themselves? Time and again, break and enter merchants would be prevented from entering with intent and recently in the news, killing one woman and leaving a sister in law bound and gagged!

Entirely reactive law enforcement limited to getting a description of the offenders and the vehicle they could be driving posted!

I guess you need to be an over privileged pollie to enjoy/warrant proactive policing?
Alan B.

Bill, your entire argument collapses at this point, before you even get to square one:
“The social contract encapsulates the complex, evolving and sometimes conflicting nature of the relationship between the citizen and the state, and its ultimate purpose is to mediate a peaceful, orderly and humane society.”

The reason is because there is no social contract.

Where is it? Show me a copy. Where did I sign?

You know you can’t and I didn’t.

There are numerous fatal flaws in the theory of social contract, which are set out in this short article “No Social Contract”:
http://economics.org.au/2010/08/no-social-contract/

It is inexcusable to conflate society with the State, since
- human society has existed for untold hundreds of thousands of years, while the State as we know it is relatively recent.
- neither the inputs nor the outputs of the State - tax and legislation - are voluntary – a complete intellectual and moral fail on your part

Human society does not come about by a “contract” between the State and its subjects. This means you have demonstrated a complete failure to understand the ontology, as you would say, of human society.

Society is not the State, and the State is not society. Okay? Got that?

“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights asserted the principles of equality, mutual respect, non-violence, freedom of speech and democracy as the foundations for a peaceful, just, harmonious and inclusive society. “

This presupposes the legitimacy of the State as a moral preceptor, which is perfectly laughable since the State has by far been the worst violator of human rights, of which the last 100 years provide more than enough examples.

“Diverse forms of media stream an unremitting and overwhelming torrent of often superficial and undifferentiated information "noise" at the citizen.”

We have just established that you are part of the noise, not part of the nuanced evidence-based discourse, else where is your EVIDENCE of the existence of the social contract?

Post it now.

“Terrorism”

All States satisfy the definition but for their own self-exempting double standard. Go ahead, look it up.

All you need to know about the phenomenon of Western terrorism from earlier times and in the now-time of the 21st century.:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Terrorism/Western_Terror.html

And people do more or less enter into an invisible social contract just by living in any modern nation state, wherein, they quite rightly expect the state to provide at least some degree of prosperity, safety and stability.
These three factors were of course always tentative and we are now entering a potentially very unstable period of history when even these three factors are becoming less and less likely even for the relative few that have, up till now benefited from them.

And it seems to me that many of those on the right-side of the culture wars shouting match are almost gleefully promoting and celebrating this disintegration.