Dear Banjo Paterson,

The difference between Yuyutsu and Don Quixote is that the latter tried to fix society while the former recognises that this is not possible due to the dark nature of the age that we live in. The most I aspire to, is to save the moral fibre of myself and of those who care to listen.

Governments will still do what governments do for millennia to come, oppressing others with their laws and policing mechanisms, but we should be aware that since we have no contract with them we have no moral obligation to keep their laws.

I cannot blame those who comply with laws out of fear, this is understandable but in principle this is no different than paying evil ransomware criminals for restoring one's files, which encourages them to continue.

Yes, when one opts out they are no longer members of that society in any way and may not for example enter its public areas, but this does not mean that one should have to pack up and leave their own home as a result and go find another place to live... under some other oppressing society, for this whole planet is divided among them.

.

Dear Yuyutsu,

.
You wrote :

« Governments will still do what governments do for millennia to come, oppressing others with their laws and policing mechanisms, but we should be aware that since we have no contract with them we have no moral obligation to keep their laws »
.

That is a very sweeping statement, Yuyutsu. What you say is, unfortunately, true to a shockingly large extent and concerns more than half of the world population, but it is by no means a general rule.

Australia is one of the rare, truly democratic countries in the world - democracy meaning “ruled by the people”. The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index 2016 classes Australia as a “full democracy”, i.e., :

[ A country in which not only basic political freedoms and civil liberties are respected, but which also tend to be underpinned by a political culture conducive to the flourishing of democracy. The functioning of government is satisfactory. Media are independent and diverse. There is an effective system of checks and balances. The judiciary is independent and judicial decisions are enforced. There are only limited problems in the functioning of a democracy. ]

Obviously, that does not mean that it is perfect. It simply means that it is one of the freest countries in the world.

Neither the federal nor the state governments make laws in Australia. Ordinary citizens are elected to Parliament to represent Australians and make laws on their behalf. Propositions for a bill to become law may come from various sources (government departments, community groups, business groups, lobby groups, political parties, parliamentary committees, etc.).

Our federal and state parliaments (the representatives of the people) make laws and our federal and state governments enforce them. If we don’t like what they do on our behalf, we vote them out and replace them with more appropriate representatives.

As to the “social contract” to which you make allusion, Jean-Jacques Rousseau postulated that State and Law were the product of the “General Will” of the people. The state and the Laws are made

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

by it and if the government and laws do not conform to the “General Will”, they would be discarded. While the individual relinquishes his “natural rights”, in return he gets civil liberties such as freedom of speech, equality, assembly, etc.

Citizens are deemed to have passed a “social contract” with the state.

I suggest you consult the following :

http://pages.eiu.com/rs/783-XMC-194/images/Democracy_Index_2016.pdf

http://www.nobelprize.org/educational/peace/democracy_map/production/index.html

http://www.dkosopedia.com/static/d/i/c/Dictators_and_Non-Democratic_Governments_2e4b.html

http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/bills-and-laws.html

.

Dear Banjo Paterson,

I acknowledge that, relatively speaking, Australia is one of the freest countries in the world.

I could argue whether Australia's system of governance is indeed democratic, but that is irrelevant and would only lead us away from the topic, for even if Australia was democratic, 'democracy' only describes the internal workings of a society rather than who are its members.

Being counted as a member of a group (and expected to comply with the obligations that come with that) forcibly and without consent, is obviously wrong. Likewise, even if one is personally comfortable, it is morally wrong to benefit from belonging to such a group that forces its membership on others.

Yuyutsu
Here are some suitable locations and no-one gets in the way.
The Island With Bear Grylls - promo | SBS World News
www.sbs.com.au/news/video/332785219582/The-Island-With-Bear-Grylls-promo
Generations of men have wondered if they could survive on a desert island. Survival expert Bear Grylls makes makes this challenge a reality for 1 ordinary citizen ...