Fading social contract: Ramesh Shrestha

Relationships based on moral principle

There are traditional relationships between individuals such as husband and wife based on trust and mutual respect, not based on any written agreement. This is a social contract that existed long before the legal requirement for marriage registration or 'I do' and 'till death do us apart' ordained by a Minister or an Imam or a Pandit. A similar contract exists between parents and children where parents are expected to protect children and children are expected to oblige parents with respect. Such unwritten social contracts are an innate relationship defining mutual responsibility between individuals that has existed for millennia. An implicit understanding is that such social contract between individuals is driven by mutual acceptance of three core elements - duty, loyalty and respect.

A similar relationship exists between the village elders and tribal chiefs with their community members where the village elders and tribal chiefs keep their communities protected from harms and provide services based on local traditional practices including on legal matters with impartial judgement. In modern society a similar relationship is exercised between the government officials and the citizens who elect them without any formal contract notwithstanding the election manifesto representing a kind of commitment which is mostly forgotten once the election is over. An implicit understanding is that the government works for the citizens with mutual acceptance of the same three core elements - duty, loyalty and respect - that defines the relationship between the citizens and the government based on the principle of moral imperative. The citizens expect the political leaders to work for the welfare of the general public and set moral standards for people to adhere to, while people generate taxes for the government function.

In recent years

Over the centuries the social organisation of human beings began changing with the wealth brought in by the industrial revolution and evolving political ideology. But the three core elements - duty, loyalty and respect - that define the relationship between the individuals and between the citizens and the government remain unchanged. The constitution which is amended periodically may redefine the rights and duties of each but the strength of social contract between the citizens and the state remains unaffected. But for social contracts to be realised in full both parties have to fulfill their responsibilities. In recent decades the commitments to social contract appear to be eroding both at the individual and at the institutional level influenced by too many external influences. Weakening of social contract is having negative impact on social justice.

With the secular change in our society brought in by changing economy, industrialisation, mobility and more recently technology, people's aspirations continue to change. Over the recent decades we notice breakdown in families, increasing divorces, individuals living alone (about 13 percent of adults are living alone) and one parent households on the rise in all societies including in developing countries. The traditional multi-generational joint family became a nuclear family, which has morphed into simple cohabitation among younger generations. Are these signs of degeneration of human civilisation or simply individual freedom taken to extreme?

We see a similar situation in government citizen relationships. Almost all governments have adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in some form to suit their local socio-cultural needs, which is a kind of the written form of traditional social contract. These include protecting but not limited to citizen rights, ensuring basic needs and services, providing justice without prejudice, protecting minority rights and maintaining law and order. But many governments seem unable to protect the freedom and rights of its citizens, which results in hunger, poverty, homelessness, internal displacement, abuse of minorities, child labour, and so on. It is agreed that there are no perfect individuals or governments anytime in history as everyone is driven by their ambitions and many other factors. But the frightening fact is that all these undesirable statistics are on the rise pointing to a breakdown of social contract.

Reasons of failure

With changing political economy throughout the world, the idea of individual freedom has been literally decoded as the single most important rights. Family as a social institution is no longer seen as a foundation of relationship. The financial independence brought in by the spread of employment opportunities may have provided a boost for people to detach from social obligations. Being financially independent is good, so it cannot be blamed. But financial independence brought in dramatic change in people's lifestyle, thinking and a sense of individualism. Social media is further accelerating the supremacy of I, myself and me, instead of we.

The changes at the institutional level are even more frightening. Over the past few decades as reported in academic papers and reliable news media, there appears to be an increasing lack of public trust in their governments across the globe. Despite the commitment of accountability and responsibility to its constituencies, the governments are becoming ever more opaque in their decision making processes. The indulgence of the private sector in governance has disfigured the functioning of government institutions including in judiciary. The promotion of public private partnership that originated during the 1990s, seemingly a benign act to deliver public services by private sector with effectiveness and efficiency has become a failure as the private sector became an instrument of manipulation including insider trading in certain sectors where the taxpayers are kept in the dark. Many government officials upon retiring from politics end up in private sector firms as advisors and act as umbilicus between the private sector and the government.

The changing landscape of media also influences the functioning of the governments. Modern media has many positive contributions but its influence on the government and the public in the name of freedom of information is causing serious harm. Media is responsible for too many political turmoils harming innocent public through fake narratives, yet, the governments are unable to regulate the media. In many cases the government itself is complicit in promoting fake narratives. With the unfettered influence of the media and private sector in governance one may even question the meaning of democratic governance and the meaning of freedom of media. The outcome of all these activities has direct negative repercussions on the functioning of the government apparatus which influence the government's role in fulfilling its role as purveyor of social contract. It erodes the principles of duty, loyalty and respect.

Is there a way out?

The idea of small government by handing over public services to the private sector seems to be the beginning of the weakening of the social contract of the government-citizen relationship. Basic needs such as education, health care and housing have become out of reach for many. It gave enormous power to the private sector in public affairs of the government. The increasing inequality between people and countries is a direct result of breach of social contract. It is vital to rescue social contracts from being monetised to save human civilisation from further decline. It is going to be an arduous battle to win but there are no other alternatives.

Read more articles by Ramesh here.

Or contact Ramesh at ramesh.chauni@gmail.com



Labels: Ramesh