Perish or Prosper--your choice of Social Contracts

The Daily Jot


Daily reporting and analysis of current events from a biblical and prophetic perspective.
Check out our newly designed website--sources, stories, Revivalution Gear, and more!



Friday, April 15, 2011


Perish or Prosper--your choice of Social Contracts



During the president's speech on fiscal policy this week, he made a curious remark. He characterized the Republican budget proposal of tax cuts and repealing socialized healthcare as being, "less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America." The Social Contract or "compact" as he put it is the foundational principle upon which the nation's government is based. The president has aggressively moved toward replacing the traditional Social Contract between Americans and their government by instituting a progressive, or socialist-based, Social Compact. He is saying that fiscal responsibility at the expense of social programs seeks to change the Social Compact.



The Social Contract between the governed and the government evolved from the times of Socrates. It is the recognition that the Laws of Nature grant mankind certain inalienable rights, especially liberty, security and property. And that man submits himself to a greater authority to protect those rights in a civil society. From the mid 1600s through the late 1700s, it was debated what type of government under the Social Contract was best. Many European philosophers believed the rule of a king, whose power was vested in him by God, was best. Other beliefs emerged that the rule of the majority, or democracy, was best. The Founding Fathers were the first to take these theories and invent a new form of government.



With the belief that God's law had endowed mankind with the rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness (originally the use of property ownership was included), the Founders developed a Constitutional Republic where the just powers of government were derived from the consent of the governed. Rather than a democracy, which they believed would lead to tyranny, they chose to establish the supreme law of the land--The Constitution--and protect the rights of the people by having them elect representatives to carry out the function of government according to the law. A limited government was to protect, or provide security to, the rights of the people. This is the "Social Contract" as the Founders envisioned it.



The president believes that those wanting limited government and fiscal responsibility changes his worldview of the "social compact." His belief is in the progressive social compact found in the Communist Manifesto, which abolishes religion and property ownership, and vests absolute power in government. Hence, his policies have altered private sector job creation, impacted property ownership through government mortgages, and is progressively making the majority of Americans dependent on the government for all their needs. This is the antithesis of the Founder's Social Contract. We must be an Exodus 18:21 people and choose leaders, "such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness" otherwise we will perish as a nation.



Have a Blessed and Powerful Day!

Bill Wilson