• AlexisFR@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    SovCits are a symptom of the breakdown of the social contract, not one of the causes.

    • UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s more a symptom of village idiots finding each other on the web and convincing themselves that they are not idiots. Its a feature of an interconnected world.

      • fkn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It makes sense when you realize they are truly stupid and have been taken in by a con. They get into situations they don’t understand, people say magic words they don’t understand and they get put in jail. Someone comes along and explains it in such a way only an idiot would believe about magic words and they want to get out. They don’t actually understand the words they are using or the context/concepts thar the words that are being used against them represent… And suddenly here we are.

    • Hamartia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      They have the morality of an atomized corporation. Always trying to externalise costs to the rest of the planet. All that matters is their own short term needs.

      It’s like a cargo cult of late stage capitalism.

      • mob@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Feels like people just say “It’s rooted in white supremacy and anti-Semitism” about anything now.

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Definitely not a cause. For a while they were a pain in the ass. Courts and lawyers didn’t know how to deal with them and they would keep coming back and back with appeals and collateral actions. Now there’s a whole playbook for disposing of their bullshit, doesn’t jam things up anymore.

      It was originally a mail order scam targeting poor, uneducated people who were charged with crimes, desperate to believe any promise of help.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I know a lawyer about a decade ago who worked for a country government dealing with one. He told me that if the guy had 6 friend he could probably fully demolish the entire government of the county. They would be bankrupt from lawsuits, everyone would be afraid to do anything for fear of getting dragged in, nothing could get approved.

        I don’t know if he was exaggerating or not but I think there is some truth to it. Things do seem to work only because no one has decided to stop it from working.

    • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think they’re more a symptom of some people wanting to feel special. Everywhere has selfish people indignant that they have to pay for goods and/or services they use.

      • Ross_audio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        What exactly is the constitution, or any law, if not a social contract.

        If you don’t like the social contracts we have, vote for someone to make them better.

        Especially when it comes to the social contracts around elections.

          • maynarkh@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            10 months ago

            You are right in that people seem to be misusing the term “social contract”. The actual definition is not vague, but broad. The point is that a person who wants to live in a society accepts its fundamental tenets as they exist in exchange for society at large letting it live amongst itself.

            So one example of a social contract might be the one that the USSR and aligned countries’ societies had, which had the fundamental law of “things will continue to improve for you, but in exchange you must support our politics”. When things stopped improving, people stopped staying out of politics and the society collapsed and reformed.

            As far as I understand, the US “social contract” is at least on the level of ideology that if you “pull yourself up by the bootstraps”, you get to “live the American Dream”. When they talk about people “rejecting the social contract”, what they mean is that they don’t think that they are getting what they want out of society at large. If it’s few people that do this, you get criminals and sovcits.

            This theory is just to explain why people at large behave differently if they perceive their society as good, just, liveable, honourable and all manner of positive things.

            Consider the sentiment of “If you saw someone steal from Walmart, you didn’t, but don’t steal from mom-and-pop shops, they need the money”.

            People say this is because since Walmart is perceived as not adhering to the social contract by stealing wages, killing off small businesses and mooching off public money. That means that, unlike mom-and-pop shops, they are fair game and not dishonourable to steal from. Formal law still applies to them, you will go to jail if they catch you all the same, but society will not shun you. In a way if you break the “unwritten law”, then it does not protect you either.

          • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            10 months ago

            social contract noun

            A usually implicit agreement among the members of an organized society or between the governed and the government defining and limiting the rights and duties of each. 
            
      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It is an implied thing not a tangible written down thing. Which is common in life. For example you are sitting on a bus with your headphones on, it is understood that I don’t sit next to you and try to talk to you, unless something out of the ordinary happens and this is critical. In the grocery store you know that your cart goes on the same side of the aisle as you drive on.

        All this stuff adds up and it becomes a basket of little rules. Follow them and things will go smoothly, don’t and they will go less smoothly. It doesn’t mean that your life is going to be even good it doesn’t mean nothing bad will happen to you it doesn’t mean everyone who breaks it will be punished. It is not even aspirational it is empirical. It is is how human civilization works.