Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Introduction
As citizen of a nation the awareness of the different rights and duties can be considered as a basic need. Included in the issues that can be considered of importance is political obligation. In relation to the said issue on political obligation, there are different concepts that are perceived to be of importance. It can be classified into different types namely the transactional accounts, the natural duty and the associative theories. Basically, the political obligation can be considered as the duty of the members of the population and the people of the nation to abide by the laws and the provisions of the constitution (Dagger, 2007).
The main focus of the study undertaken is the idea of contract or political consent as ground of political obligation. The concept of political consent can be recognized under the concept of transactional accounts wherein the main view that can be perceived is the morality in terms of the relationship between the citizen and the members of the population and the leaders of the estate (Ripstein, 1987).
Background Information on the Theory of Consent
Basically, the main focus is to present the different effects that can be related to the provisions of the said law and political theory. To be able to determine the effects of the said comment, it is important to primarily define the concept of consent. Consent can be defined as the right of control that can be given to the state over a particular citizen of a nation. For that matter, although the said right is given to the state, it means that once the citizen surrendered the said right, it now becomes a duty to the state to be able to follow the rules and laws (Dagger, 2007).
The theory of consent can be considered as just one of the different types of contemporary concepts that are related to the concept of political obligation. Included in the said concept of political obligation are views that are related to the gratitude, fair play, membership, or natural duty. The said concepts can be considered as the main reason that can be presented in relation to the application of the political obligation concepts. One of the said concepts can be applied but basically the combinations of the components of the individual concepts are considered as ideal optimum (Dagger, 2007; Ripstein, 1987).
Based on the gathered data, then, that refers to the relationship of consent it can be considered that an understanding can be achieved through the determination of its relationship with the said concepts.
Also, upon determination of the different background information, a view on the political consent can be achieved.
The Definition of Consent as an Argument in Political Obligation
The consent of the citizen and the members of the population can be defined on the basis of the effects that can be observed by the experts and political analysts. As a ground of political obligation, the concept of consent is commonly viewed as a way towards the achievement of the state of the control over the people. There are varying views regarding the said issue. There are those groups that agree on the fact that once the people voluntarily give political consent, the state can translate it towards political obligation.
Of the different views of political consent, the said view can be considered as the most controversial. This can be attributed to the fact that the rights of people can be viewed to be violated. The said views were presented by different political philosophers. Based on a group of philosophers the political obligation cannot be based on the consent given by the people regarding their rights. But the question based on the said theory can be considered as enough reason to consider focus on the review of the said political theory.
Based on the view of Beran (1987), the political consent that can be given by the citizen and the members of the population cannot be assumed. This is specifically related to the fact that political obligation often assumes the right of the people to present their views. The leaders of the state often perceive that due to the fact that consent can be assumed on a general basis, that people must follow the rules of law without question.
For that matter, it can be considered negative on the side of the members of the population since it is their right of choice that is affected. Although following the law and the provisions of law is a duty on the part of the people and mandatory at that, it can be considered still the right of the people to make their choice. It can then be considered consent cannot be translated as an obligation
In addition to the said view then, to be able to prevent the questions on the obligation of the people based on consent, it is important to achieve an individual knowledge, permission and recognition of the leadership and control of the government over the people are needed to be expressed. This can be related to the view of the philosophers regarding the need for ways to be able to know and determine the real consent of the people.
Though it can be considered as a point of view that has questions in the present modern application, the said concerns are included in the main objectives that are viewed as essential. When the term consent is considered as the main basis, it can be considered that the main person is in control of his choices, e.g. the members of the population and the citizen. In relation to the said view one scenario that can be perceived is the freedom to be able to obey the law and another is to have the right to decline at own risk. This is on the basis of the fact that obligations to the law cannot be based on the concept of consent.
The said view can be considered as positive on the basis of the perceived meaning of the term consent. On the other hand it can be considered that due to the fact that a citizen belongs to the particular nation, the laws of the state are needed to be upheld. For that matter, if the views of consent that is presented in the classic view of political consent, the citizen is needed to move out of the territory of the choice is not to follow the political obligation and not to provide the state with the consent to lead them.
On the other hand, other philosophers have more modern views regarding the concept of political consent. In the said school of thought, it was perceived that there are different ways in the modern era that are considered to be an application of political consent. One is the issue of residence. It can be perceived that once a person resides in a particular territory, the consent can be assumed to be surrendered to the state (Dagger, 2007; Hume, 1965). The said view can be considered contrary to the classic view of political consent.
The said view based on the residency can be considered as both positive and negative depending on the point of view delegated.
For that matter, when the view of the state is considered the consent of the people is entrusted to the state. On the other hand, once the citizen resides in the country, due to the fact that the consent cannot be questioned and recognized as the other groups of philosophers suggest, the said act of residency is considered as the ask of entrusting consent.
One of the negative effects of the said view is the case of the poor members of the nation. In such cases, the said members of the society had no choice when it comes to residency. For that matter it can then be translated as submitting and surrendering the political consent to the government regardless of their choice. This is due to the fact that the said members of the population cannot leave the territory encompassed by the state for which consent is involved.
Based on the study presented by Simmons, the view of Locke and his contemporary political philosophers is an important view but cannot be considered as an adequate ground for the imposition of political obligation. In terms of the tacit consent which is commonly the main case in the present era, the different actions such as residency can be considered as a way and method of articulating consent but cannot be bound to the said cases only. There are considerations in terms of the application of the political consent as grounds for political obligation (Simmons, 1976).
Certain conditions are needed to be considered to be able to perceive that the rights of both parties specifically the people are sustained. One of the said conditions is the knowledge of the people that they have a choice in terms of the provision of their political consent to the state. Also, the people are needed to be given the right and time to raise questions and clarify rights when the need take place.
Due to the fact that not all citizens and residence of the country are aware of the said issue and their particular right, the information is needed to be disseminated to the people (Dagger, 2007; Simmons, 1976).
Conclusion
The effects of the political consent as ground for political obligation then can be considered as a complex issue specifically on the basis of the fact that there is a plurality of principles. This is in addition to the consideration that the said notion involves legality. The factors of the need to subdue to the law and the possible confusion regarding the different translations of the principle of obligation and the principle of consent can be considered as the most serious challenge related to the issue.
For that matter, superficially the present state of understanding of the principles of obligation on the grounds of consent can be perceived in confusion and thus can have negative effects on the efficiency of application.
Reference
Beran, H. (1987). The Consent Theory of Political Obligation. New York: Croom Helm.
Dagger, R. (2007). Political Obligation. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, CSLI, Stanford University.
Hume, D. (1965). On the Social Contract. In A. MacIntyre (ed.), Humes Ethical Writings. New York: Collier-Macmillan.
Jenkins, J.J. (1970). Political Consent. Philosophical Quarterly 20, p. 60-66.
Kramnick, J. B. (2005). Locke, Haywood, and Consent. ELH 72 (2), p. 453-470.
Plamenatz, J.P. (2nd ed) (1968). Consent, Freedom and Political Obligation. London, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Singer, P. (1973) Democracy and Disobedience. New York and London: Oxford University Press.
Ripstein, A. (1987). Foundations in Political Theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs 16: 115-37, p. 133.
Simmons, J. A. (1976). Tacit Consent and Political Obligation. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 5 (3), p. 274-291.
Walzer, M. (1970). Obligations: Essays on Disobedience, War and Citizenship. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.